Restore backup

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

The description goes beyond the destructiveHint annotation by explicitly warning that 'All data on the virtual machine will be overwritten with the data from the backup.' It also discloses that the restore may take time, which is valuable behavioral context for an agent.

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 short and every sentence contributes a distinct fact: the action, the potential delay, the destructive overwrite warning, and the intended use case. There is no filler or redundant restatement.

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 destructive restore operation, the description covers the target, the action, the overwrite consequence, and the time expectation. It does not mention how to track the asynchronous restore process, but enough is provided for safe invocation.

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 both parameters (backupId and virtualMachineId) are already described in the input schema. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 a backup for a specified virtual machine.' It is not a tautology and distinguishes itself from siblings like VPS_getBackupsV1 and VPS_restoreSnapshotV1 by clearly naming backup as the restore source.

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 final sentence gives an explicit usage directive: 'Use this endpoint to recover VPS data from backup points.' This provides clear context for when to use the tool, though it does not explicitly exclude alternatives such as VPS_restoreSnapshotV1.

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