restore

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

The description usefully discloses cost behavior (zero API cost by default) and the reembedding path. However, with no annotations present, it leaves an important gap: it does not state whether restoring overwrites, merges with, or clears existing memories, nor any side effects of the restore operation.

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, each earning its place. The core action is front-loaded, and the optional behavior is explained immediately after, with zero 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?

Adequate for invoking the tool with its two parameters, given full schema coverage and no output schema. However, the missing description of whether existing memories are replaced or preserved is a meaningful gap for a state-changing restore operation.

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%, so parameters are already documented. The description adds value by explaining the practical implication of reembed=true ('for provider changes') and the cost difference, which the schema does not convey.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: restore memories from a backup JSON file. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like backup, remember, and recall, and the difference from 'backup' is immediately inferable.

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 guidance on the default behavior (reuse stored vectors) and when to override it (set reembed=true for provider changes). It does not explicitly mention alternatives, but the context is sufficient for correct use.

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