seo_restore_keyword

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the soft-delete mechanism, silent no-op behavior for non-deleted IDs, and that the `restored` count reflects only changed rows, which is valuable operational detail beyond what the schema provides.

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 four sentences with no redundancy; each sentence delivers purpose, context, usage, or behavioral nuance, and it is front-loaded with the core action.

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?

For a simple two-parameter tool with no output schema, the description provides complete context: what it does, when to use it, how to find input IDs, and the behavior of the restore operation. Nothing important is missing.

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?

Both parameters are already fully described in the schema (100% coverage), so the description adds no new parameter-level meaning. It reinforces that keywordIds come from seo_list_keyword_ids, which the schema also states, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 undoes a soft-delete by clearing deletedAt on given SeoScoredKeyword ids, making them reappear in the keyword list tools. This specific verb+resource+effect distinguishes it from sibling deletion and listing tools.

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?

It explicitly instructs to use this tool after seo_delete_keyword or seo_bulk_delete_keywords removed something unwanted, and provides the exact method to find deleted ids via seo_list_keyword_ids with includeDeleted=true. It also labels it as a housekeeping operation outside the main flow.

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