Restore a hidden chat

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral load. It does disclose the effect ('shows up in the app again'), the decryption step, the unlock prerequisite, and the dual target contexts (app session vs. extension web chat). It does not say what happens if the id is not hidden, whether the operation is reversible, or how failures surface.

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?

One front-loaded sentence covering the effect plus a two-word prerequisite sentence. No redundancy, no filler, and the core action leads.

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 mutation with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers effect, prerequisite, and the app/extension distinction. It is slightly thin on edge cases (unhiding a non-hidden id, error behavior), but nothing essential is missing.

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% and the single 'id' parameter is fully documented in the schema (vault id or original session id), so the description need not repeat it. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting and the description adds no parameter detail.

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 gives a specific verb and resource - it decrypts a hidden session back into the app's normal listing - which is clearly the inverse of hide_session and distinct from read_hidden/list_hidden. It never names a sibling explicitly, but the operation is unambiguous.

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?

It states the prerequisite ('Requires unlock'), which is useful context, but gives no explicit when-to-use vs. alternatives (e.g. when to restore vs. simply read a hidden chat). Usage is implied by the name rather than spelled out.

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