Restore a database from recycle bin

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

Annotations already declare this is a non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent operation on an open world, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the useful precondition that the identifier comes from db_recycle_bin, but says nothing about failure behavior, whether the DB is restored under its original name, or what happens to the recycle-bin entry.

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?

A single sentence with no filler; the verb and required input source are front-loaded and nothing is redundant.

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 one-parameter mutation with no output schema and annotations that already cover the safety profile, the description is nearly sufficient. It could say more about post-restore state or errors, but an agent has what it needs to call it correctly.

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 100% and the schema already gives an example rname. The description goes beyond the schema by telling the agent where the value must come from (the recycle bin listing), which is operationally necessary and not encoded in the parameter definition.

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?

States a specific verb (restore) and resource (deleted database), and explicitly ties the operation to the recycle bin, which cleanly separates it from sibling db_recycle_bin (list) and db_delete.

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?

Names the source of the required input ('the rname shown by db_recycle_bin'), which implicitly tells the agent to call db_recycle_bin first. No explicit when-not condition or mention of alternatives such as db_import_sql, but the context is clear.

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