restoreBackupRestore a saved backup snapshot to an app, overwriting its current volume contents. Provide workspace slug, app slug, and backup ID to revert to a previous state.
Overwrites the app's current volume contents with the snapshot. There is no undo.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| env | No | ||
| region | No | ||
| appSlug | Yes | ||
| backupId | Yes | ||
| workspaceSlug | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.5.1Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
It explicitly discloses the destructive overwrite behavior and the lack of undo, going beyond the destructiveHint annotation by describing the exact effect on volume contents.
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 two short sentences with no filler, front-loading the core action and the critical warning.
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 conveys the essential destructive effect but lacks surrounding context such as parameter meanings, any preconditions, or what happens after the restore. It is adequate but minimal.
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?
None of the five parameters (workspaceSlug, appSlug, backupId, env, region) are explained in the description, and the schema has no descriptions. The agent is left to infer their meanings from names alone.
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 tool's action: overwriting the app's current volume contents with a snapshot. This is specific and distinguishes it from backup listing or deployment rollback tools.
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 provides no guidance on when to use this over sibling tools such as rollbackDeploy or listBackups. It only warns that there is no undo, which is cautionary rather than usage direction.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.