restore_entity

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses key behaviors: creates a restoration observation, priority 1001, overrides deletion, makes entity visible, and is immutable for audit. Missing details on idempotency or failure states but sufficient for a simple restore.

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?

Four sentences, front-loaded with the core action. Every sentence adds value: mechanism, outcome, immutability. No redundant or unnecessary information.

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?

No output schema, so return values are not described. The description explains the effect (entity becomes visible) but omits error conditions and response format. Adequate for a simple mutation 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 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds audit context for the 'reason' parameter but does not elaborate on parameter usage beyond schema. No significant added value.

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 'Restore a deleted entity' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like delete_entity and restore_relationship by focusing on entities and explaining the restoration mechanism (observation, priority 1001).

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 restoring deleted entities but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like restore_relationship, nor prerequisites (e.g., entity must be deleted).

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