restore_page

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only gives the core function. It fails to disclose behavioral traits such as idempotency, error conditions (e.g., if page is not archived), or required permissions. The minimal disclosure is insufficient for safe invocation.

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?

A single sentence with no filler, but it could be more descriptive. It is concise, though slightly over-condensed given the lack of other structured data.

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 a single parameter, the description is too sparse. It does not explain return values, side effects, or prerequisites (e.g., the page must be archived). This is incomplete for an agent to use correctly.

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?

The input schema has 100% description coverage, but the description 'Page ID' adds no extra meaning beyond the field name. The tool description itself doesn't elaborate on the parameter, so it meets the baseline but adds no value.

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The description clearly states the action (restore) and the target resource (an archived page), which is unambiguous and distinguishes it from the opposite tool 'archive_page'.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives like 'restore_toggle'. The context implies it's for restoring pages, but no exclusions or preconditions are stated.

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