context.restore

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

The annotations already indicate readOnly=false, destructive=false, idempotent=true, and the description adds only 'session-local' and 'previously captured' context. It does not explain whether restoring overwrites the current context or what happens with an invalid snapshot_id, though it does not contradict the annotations.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It efficiently conveys the verb, the object, and the scope.

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 one-parameter restore operation with an output schema and annotations, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks explicit context about how restoration affects the current session state and how this tool relates to context.snapshot and context.get.

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 description coverage is 0%, and the description never mentions snapshot_id or how it is obtained. The parameter name is self-explanatory to a degree, but the description does not compensate for the missing schema documentation or connect snapshot_id to context.snapshot.

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 identifies the action ('Restore'), the resource ('previously captured session-local Blender context snapshot'), and the scope ('session-local'). It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like context.snapshot or context.get, so it relies on semantic inference rather than explicit contrast.

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 phrase 'previously captured' implies that a snapshot must already exist and suggests a prerequisite relationship with context.snapshot. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any exclusions or warnings.

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