local_ydb_restore_tenant

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint true, but the description adds critical nuance: without confirm=true it's a dry-run that returns a plan and does not write data. It also discloses optional post-restore verification 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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action, and no extraneous information. Every part is necessary and well-organized.

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?

Covers the execution flow (plan vs write, verification) but lacks detail on the output of the restore plan or verification results. Since there is no output schema, some description of return values 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?

All 7 parameters have descriptions in the schema (100% coverage), so the description adds limited additional meaning. It summarizes the role of confirm and verification parameters, but does not significantly enhance what the schema already provides.

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 clearly states the tool restores a tenant/destination from a dump, with optional verification. It distinguishes from sibling tools like dump_tenant (opposite) and bootstrap (setup) by specifying the restore action and its prerequisites.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (after bootstrap/rebuild when target tenant is ready) and the effect of confirm=true vs plan-only. Could be more specific about when not to use, but the guidance is clear and actionable.

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