undo_bulk_delete_targets

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the 60-second time limit and the scope of restoration (domain/tags only, not scan history), giving the agent key expectations beyond the raw operation. It does not mention failure behavior on expired batch, but that is minor for a simple undo tool.

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?

Two sentences, no filler. The main action is front-loaded, followed by the temporal constraint and restoration scope. Every clause adds information, making it highly efficient.

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 single-parameter undo operation with no output schema, the description covers the prerequisite (undo_batch), the time constraint, and the restoration scope. It omits only error-handling details, which are not critical for correct invocation. Overall, it is adequately complete.

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 schema has no description coverage (0%), so the description must compensate. It explains that the single parameter 'undo_batch' is the identifier from the prior delete call's response, which is essential meaning beyond the schema label 'Undo Batch'. This is sufficient given the simple one-parameter case.

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 specific verb ('Re-create'), the resource ('targets deleted by a prior bulk_delete_targets call'), and ties the action to a prior delete call. It also clarifies what is restored (domain/tags only) and what is not (scan history), clearly distinguishing it from the delete counterpart and other restore operations.

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?

Provides clear context on when to use: it requires an undo_batch from a previous bulk_delete_targets call and a 60-second validity window. It does not explicitly name alternatives like restore_target, but the bulk-deletion prerequisite implies the appropriate scenario. Lacks explicit exclusion guidance, hence not a 5.

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