Restore Document Version

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

Annotations only indicate readOnly=false and destructive=false. The description adds valuable behavior: current version is saved to history first, then the specified version becomes current. This clarifies that existing data is preserved before change, going beyond annotation hints.

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?

Two concise sentences: the first states the purpose, the second adds behavioral context. No filler or redundancy. Front-loaded and 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?

With an output schema present, return values are covered. Tool complexity is low, but the description lacks parameter semantics and guidance on when to use this over siblings. It provides adequate behavioral context but has clear informational gaps for an AI agent.

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% and the description does not explain doc_id or version. The phrase 'previous version' implies the version parameter, but there is no detail on version numbering, format, or doc_id identification. This fails to compensate for missing schema descriptions.

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?

Description uses specific verb 'Restore' with resource 'document version', clearly distinguishing it from siblings like vault_doc_history (view history) and vault_update_doc (edit current content). The purpose is immediately obvious.

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 states what the tool does but gives no explicit when-to-use or alternatives. Implied use is rollback to a previous version, but it does not reference sibling tools like vault_doc_history for selecting a version or exclude alternative scenarios.

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