backups_restore

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full behavioral disclosure burden. It fails to warn that restoring will likely overwrite or replace the target user's current data, nor does it mention required privileges or irreversibility. The 'confirm: Required' line hints at a safety step but does not explain the actual consequences.

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, front-loaded with the purpose, and contains no filler. The Args block is minimal and each line earns its place.

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?

Although an output schema exists so return values are covered, this is a destructive restore operation with no annotations. The description lacks any warning about overwriting target data, necessary permissions, or confirmation semantics, making it incomplete for safe 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 adds useful meaning for username ('Account to restore into') and file ('Backup filename as listed by the panel'). However, the confirm parameter is only described as 'Required', which is vague and also conflicts with the schema where confirm is optional with a default of false.

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 ('Restore') and a specific resource ('a user from a local backup file'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling backup tools such as backups_create or backups_admin_list.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no exclusions. The description simply restates the action and its arguments.

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