Restore cipher put

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is largely covered. The description adds only the 'from trash' context; it says nothing about what happens if the cipher is not trashed, what state the restore produces, or any permission requirements.

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 five-word sentence with no filler and the key action front-loaded. It is efficient but borders on under-specified rather than genuinely compact.

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?

With four parameters at 0% schema coverage and no output schema, this description is too thin to guide correct invocation. It should at minimum document cipher_id and clarify the roles of the form/params/json_body pass-throughs.

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% across four parameters, so the description needs to compensate and does not. Beyond the word 'one' hinting that a single cipher identifier is required, it never explains cipher_id or the opaque form/params/json_body parameters.

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 names a specific verb and resource ('Restore one cipher') and adds the source state ('from trash'). The word 'one' implicitly distinguishes it from bulk siblings like vaultwarden_restore_cipher_selected, though no sibling is named explicitly.

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?

Usage is only implied: an agent can infer this applies to a cipher currently in the trash, but the description never states the precondition or points to vaultwarden_restore_cipher_selected for multiple ciphers, nor to the _admin variant.

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