restore_snapshot

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses important behaviors: it creates a backup of the current state before restoring (enabling undo), and it defaults to a dry run (simulation). This is good transparency for a potentially destructive operation.

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 three sentences long, every sentence adds unique information (purpose, undo capability, default simulation). No fluff, highly efficient.

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?

The description adequately covers the tool's purpose, effect, and default behavior for a simple 2-parameter tool with no output schema. It could optionally mention what the response looks like, but is otherwise complete.

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 100%, but the description adds value beyond the schema by explaining that the 'name' parameter corresponds to snapshot names from list_snapshots and that 'dry_run' defaults to true (simulation mode). This helps the agent understand the parameter semantics and default behavior.

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 the action (restore, recover) and resource (previous backup/snapshot), and implicitly distinguishes from siblings like create_snapshot and list_snapshots by focusing on restoration.

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 provides clear context: it mentions that the tool saves a backup before restoring (making it reversible) and that it simulates by default. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or when not to use it.

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