Retrieve Recycled Link

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

The description discloses permission needs and that the tool performs an update (returning the modified object). However, the internal inconsistency between 'retrieve and restore' and 'update' undermines clarity. Annotations (readOnlyHint: false, destructiveHint: false) are not contradicted, but the description does not fully clarify the behavior.

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 verbose and repetitive, e.g., 'Updates the specified Project-Level Configuration records' appears twice. It lacks a clear, front-loaded structure and could be much more concise.

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?

The tool's action is ambiguous, and the description does not fully explain what 'retrieve and restore' vs. 'update' means. There is no output schema, and the return value is vaguely stated as 'the modified object'. The description is insufficient for an AI agent to fully understand the tool's functionality.

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 input schema has 100% coverage for its two parameters, so the schema already describes them. The description redundantly states that project_id and id are required, adding no new meaning beyond the schema.

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 starts by stating it retrieves and restores a link from the recycle bin, but then contradicts itself by saying it updates Project-Level Configuration records. The purpose is unclear: is it a restore action or an update? This confusion reduces clarity.

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 mentions permission requirements but does not provide guidance on when to use this tool vs. other similar tools (e.g., list_recycled_links, restore_recycled_*). No differentiation from siblings is given.

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