db_restore

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses the destructive behavior (DROP TABLE + CREATE TABLE) and the requirement for user confirmation, which are the most critical side effects and preconditions.

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 concise (two sentences), front-loads the primary action, and then emphasizes the critical destructive warning, making it well-structured and easy to follow.

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?

It covers the core action, destructive nature, and confirmation requirement, but does not mention return values or post-restore behavior. Given no output schema, a brief note on expected success/failure would improve completeness, but it is not essential.

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 already provides full descriptions for both parameters (confirm and filename), so the tool description adds no additional semantic value beyond what is already documented. Schema coverage is 100%, keeping the baseline at 3.

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 action ('Restaura un dump SQL') and the resource ('en la base de datos activa'), making it unambiguous and distinct from sibling tools like db_dump or rollback_apply.

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 ask the user for confirmation before executing (with confirm=true), providing a clear when-to-use condition. It does not mention alternatives, but the destructive nature implicitly cautions against casual use.

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