restore_prompt_snippet

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

Even though no annotations are provided, the description discloses important behavioral details: no version check is performed, and a 409 error can occur if a live snippet claims the same name/slot. This goes beyond what the input schema reveals.

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 concise sentences: first states the main purpose, second adds critical behavioral constraints. No extraneous words.

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?

The description covers the action, a key behavioral constraint (no version check), and an error scenario. However, it could explicitly clarify that the snippet must be soft-deleted (implied) and what happens if it's already live.

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 a single 'id' parameter. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema's own description.

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 'Undo delete_prompt_snippet — bring a soft-deleted prompt_snippet back.' It specifies the verb 'restore', the resource 'prompt_snippet', and distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_prompt_snippet and list_deleted_prompt_snippets.

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 soft-delete via delete_prompt_snippet, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like restore_persona or restore_flow. No 'when not to use' or exclusion criteria provided.

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