session_restore

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

The description discloses that the tool 'does not undo side effects,' which is a crucial behavioral detail. However, with no annotations provided, it could further clarify whether the operation is destructive, idempotent, or requires an active session.

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 two short sentences, front-loading the core functionality and then adding a key behavioral caveat. No wasted words.

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 tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description is largely sufficient. It explains the main action, default behavior, and a limitation (side effects). A minor gap is the lack of information about return values or error handling.

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 fully described in the input schema (100% coverage). The description adds minimal value beyond the schema, mainly reiterating the default behavior for checkpoint_id. Baseline score of 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 identifies the action ('restore'), the target resource ('remote session's workspace files'), and a key condition ('omit checkpoint_id to restore the most recent'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like session_checkpoint (create) and session_destroy (destroy).

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 implies usage by mentioning the default behavior for checkpoint_id, but it does not explicitly state when to choose this tool over siblings or any prerequisites or limitations.

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