restore_snapshot

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

No annotations provided, so description must disclose behavior. It does not specify whether restoration overwrites an existing VM or creates a new one, nor any side effects or permissions required. The return value description is minimal.

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?

Very concise with a clear structure: short description followed by Args and Returns sections. Every sentence is necessary, though additional context could be added without sacrificing conciseness.

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?

Given no output schema and low annotations, the description is incomplete. It omits return value details, output format, and behavioral nuances. For a simple tool it may suffice, but more depth would improve completeness.

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 0%, so description compensates by briefly explaining each parameter's purpose ('Name to give to the restored VM' and 'ID of the snapshot'). However, no constraints, formats, or examples are given, which is adequate but not rich.

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?

Description states the action 'Restore a VM from a snapshot' with clear verb and object. It distinguishes from siblings like 'snapshot' and 'destroy_vm' by naming the specific restore operation, but lacks explicit differentiation language.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as creating a new snapshot or destroying a VM. Prerequisites or conditions for restoration are not mentioned.

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