restore

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions recovery and listing trash, but does not cover safety, permissions, side effects (e.g., whether recovery removes from trash), or success/failure responses.

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 concise with one sentence, front-loading the core purpose. However, it omits the 'help' parameter, so some conciseness is at the cost of completeness.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema, the description covers the main functionality but lacks details on the 'help' parameter and output behavior. It is adequate but not fully 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 description coverage is 0%. The description adds meaning for the 'id' parameter (optional, lists trash if omitted) but completely ignores the 'help' parameter, leaving its purpose unexplained.

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 verb 'recover' and the resource 'trashed lore/doc', and explains the behavior when no id is provided (lists trash). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'rm' (remove) and 'cleanup' (delete trashed).

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 usage for recovering trashed items and lists trash when no id is given, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance.

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