Restore from trash

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

The description discloses the core behavior (restore) and the two invocation modes, but it does not address edge cases like providing both profile_uuids and all=true simultaneously, or what happens if the specified profiles are not in trash. The annotations are minimal, so the description carries some burden but fails to cover these behavioral nuances.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the action, and efficiently conveys both invocation modes without any fluff or redundancy.

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?

For a tool with only two optional parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and modes. However, it misses the potential conflict when both parameters are supplied and does not hint at any error conditions or prerequisites, leaving a small gap in completeness.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description rephrases the parameter meanings ('specific ones via profile_uuids' and 'everything via all=true') but does not add new semantics such as exclusivity or format constraints beyond what the schema already provides.

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) and resource (profiles from trash), and differentiates it from sibling tools like permanently_delete and list_trash by specifying the two modes of operation (specific UUIDs or all).

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 clear context for when to use the tool (to restore profiles from trash) and outlines the choice between specific and bulk restore. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, such as using list_trash to inspect trash first or avoiding this tool for permanent deletion.

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