hs4.admin.system.restore.start

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It omits critical traits: that a system restore is likely destructive, requires confirmation and maintenance window, and involves side effects. The schema hints at safety parameters (confirm, dryRun) but the description does not surface them.

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 a single sentence with no wasted words. However, given the tool's complexity (11 parameters, no output schema), it could be slightly more informative without becoming verbose. Still, it earns high marks for being concise.

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 complex system-level tool with many parameters and no output schema or annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain the restore workflow, what happens upon invocation, expected outcomes, or how to safely use it. The schema covers parameters but the overall process is opaque.

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 description coverage is 82%, so the schema already documents most parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond repeating the action. Baseline 3 is appropriate because the schema does the heavy lifting.

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 ('Start') and the resource ('system restore workflow'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like hs4.admin.system.backup.start (backup vs restore) and other admin operations. The verb-resource combination is specific and unambiguous.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as hs4.admin.system.backup.start, hs4.admin.system.config.set, or hs4.admin.system.service.restart. No prerequisites, when-not-to-use, or workflow context are mentioned.

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