Restore campaign

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

Annotations already declare non-readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, so safety is covered structurally. The description adds genuinely new context beyond annotations: the Plunk v0.15+ version prerequisite, the fact that deletion is permanent while archiving is reversible, and the restored return value.

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?

Bold-labeled sections (Purpose, Not for, Returns, Use when, Note) front-load the essential purpose and route the agent quickly. Every line carries information; no filler.

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 single-parameter restore tool with no output schema, the description supplies purpose, exclusions, return value, and a version prerequisite. An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly.

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?

There is a single 'id' parameter with 100% schema coverage ('Campaign UUID'), so the schema fully documents it. The description adds nothing about the identifier format or source, which is acceptable at this coverage level but not above baseline.

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?

States a specific verb+resource ('bring an archived campaign back') and clearly distinguishes this from the sibling archive/delete operations by naming what it is not for (deletion recovery). An agent can pick this over plunk_delete_campaign and plunk_archive_campaign without reading further.

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?

Provides explicit 'Not for' exclusions (deleted campaigns, permanent deletion) and a concrete 'Use when' condition (archived campaign needed again, to review or duplicate). This is exactly the when/when-not guidance the dimension rewards.

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