restore_backup

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure and fails entirely. It does not state what the restore overwrites, whether the operation is destructive, what permissions are required, or whether it is reversible or causes downtime.

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 only two words, which is under-specified rather than concise. It is front-loaded with the action, but it lacks the structure and detail needed to be useful for an agent.

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?

Given no annotations, no output schema, and an undocumented required parameter, the description is completely inadequate. An agent cannot call this tool correctly without additional context that the definition does not provide.

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 schema has one required parameter 'id' with 0% description coverage, and the description adds no meaning. It does not clarify whether 'id' is a backup ID, a filename, or another identifier, leaving the parameter semantically opaque.

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 'Restore backup' merely restates the tool name 'restore_backup'. It states a verb and resource, but adds no specific scope, target, or distinction from siblings like recover_snapshot or load_snapshot.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_backups, create_backup, or recover_snapshot. The implied usage is obvious from the name, but no prerequisites, exclusions, or routing advice are given.

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