restore_key

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It clearly discloses the precondition (key must be in DELETE_PENDING state), the timing constraint (before waiting period expires), and the core behavior of canceling the pending deletion. It does not detail post-restore state or side effects, but for this simple operation the behavior is well conveyed.

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 compact and front-loaded: the use case appears first, followed by the core action and a single parameter explanation. Every sentence contributes useful information with no repetition or filler.

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 simple one-parameter tool with no output schema, the description covers when to invoke it, the required key state, and the parameter format. It could mention what state the key returns to after restoration, but the information provided is sufficient for correct invocation.

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%, so the description must compensate. It does by explaining that key_identifier accepts a Key ARN or alias and must refer to a key in DELETE_PENDING state, adding meaningful guidance beyond the bare schema property name.

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 states a clear verb-resource pair: 'Cancel a pending key deletion' and 'recover' a key scheduled for deletion. This makes the tool's purpose obvious and distinguishes it from sibling tools like delete_key, which schedules the deletion.

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 gives an explicit use case: call when a key was scheduled for deletion by mistake and needs recovery before the waiting period expires. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use other key-management tools, but the context is clear enough for correct selection.

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