project_restore_encrypted

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

Annotations already indicate idempotentHint=false and openWorldHint=true. The description adds that it uses a passphrase from an env var, but does not elaborate on side effects or destructive potential beyond what annotations imply. Some additional context is provided but not extensive.

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, front-loaded sentence without wasted words. However, it sacrifices completeness for brevity, especially regarding parameters.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description does not cover several parameters or provide usage context for them. For a tool with 6 parameters and complex restore operation, the description is incomplete.

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 0%, so the description should explain parameters. It only explains source and passphraseEnv, but there are 6 parameters total (name, root, projectId, confirmProjectId missing). This leaves significant ambiguity.

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 it decrypts and restores an encrypted project backup using a passphrase from an environment variable. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like project_restore (non-encrypted) and project_backup_encrypted (encrypted backup creation).

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 implies use when restoring an encrypted backup with a passphrase in an env var. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use, but the context is clear enough for an agent to infer.

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