restore_agent

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

Discloses two key behaviors: no version check (to avoid stale guard) and possible 409 conflict. Without annotations, these are important. Could add more about authorization or side effects, but sufficient for a simple restore.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded purpose, no redundant words. Every sentence adds value.

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 no output schema and one parameter, description covers core function and key edge case (conflict). Could mention that agent must be in deleted state, but implied. Adequate for a straightforward tool.

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?

Only one parameter 'id' with schema description. Tool description does not add extra meaning (e.g., how to obtain the id). With 100% schema coverage, baseline is 3.

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?

Clearly states the action 'restore' and the resource 'agent', explicitly linking to 'undo delete_agent'. Distinct from sibling restore tools by naming the specific resource.

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?

Describes the context (soft-deleted agent) and potential conflict (409 if name/slot taken). Lacks explicit 'when not to use' or comparison to alternatives, but the conflict warning provides enough guidance.

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