Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations indicate this is a non-read, non-destructive operation. The description adds that it restores a previously deleted item, but does not disclose side effects, prerequisites (e.g., the package must be in deleted state), or return behavior. With annotations present, the description provides minimal additional behavioral context.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It effectively communicates the tool's purpose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's simplicity (one required parameter, output schema present), the description is largely complete. However, it lacks constraints like whether the package must be in a deleted state or if restoration is reversible, which would be helpful but not critical for a simple restoration.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% with one parameter already described as 'Service package ID to restore'. The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('restore'), the resource ('service package'), and the identification method ('by ID'). It is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools like delete_service_package and get_service_package.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage after a deletion but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention when not to use it. No exclusions or context are provided.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.