untrash_item

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. 'Restore' implies a write operation, but the description does not mention that confirm=true is required, that permissions may be needed, or what side effects the restoration has. This is a meaningful gap for a mutation tool.

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 one short sentence with no filler and the core action is front-loaded. Every word contributes to the stated purpose.

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 6-parameter tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is underspecified. It does not explain the selector concept, the confirm requirement, or the necessary conditions for a successful restore, leaving the agent to infer important operational details.

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 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description's 'selectors' phrasing hints at the multiple identification parameters (itemId, shareId, itemTitle, vaultName), but it does not clarify how they combine or whether at least one is required beyond agentReason. The schema handles most parameter meaning on its own.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Restore an item from trash by selectors.' This clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like trash_item and delete_item. The action is unambiguous despite the slightly vague 'by selectors' qualifier.

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 phrase 'from trash' implies the tool should be used on items that are currently trashed, which gives some usage context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it, nor does it mention alternatives such as view_item or search_items for locating the trashed item first.

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