Restore from Snapshot

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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses that the tool returns JavaScript strings, reads the API key from sessionStorage, depends on prior setup, and warns to snapshot before restoring. It does not explicitly state that the restore overwrites/destroys current data, but the strong safety warning implies it. This is substantial beyond what the schema provides.

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 front-loaded with the core purpose, then each subsequent sentence earns its place: execution instructions, sessionStorage/setup dependency, and a safety warning. It is compact with no filler or repetition.

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 tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description explains the overall workflow: reading a snapshot, returning scripts, executing them in a browser, handling setup expiration, and taking a pre-restore snapshot. The only notable gap is the lack of an explicit statement about the destructive nature of the restore operation, but the caution addresses it indirectly.

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?

The schema already describes snapshotPath as 'Absolute path to the snapshot file to restore' with 100% coverage. The description only refers to 'a local snapshot file' without adding any new detail about the parameter's format, constraints, or behavior. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 first sentence uses a specific verb and resource: 'Read a local snapshot file and return JavaScript strings to restore the data via the Plugin API.' It clearly differentiates from siblings like pl_snapshot (creating a snapshot) and pl_export (exporting current state) by focusing on restoring from a snapshot via generated scripts.

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 gives clear execution context: run the returned scripts in the browser using Playwright or Chrome DevTools MCP. It also states a prerequisite (run pl_setup again if the tab closed) and a strong recommendation to snapshot before restoring. It lacks explicit 'when not to use' or alternative tool references, but the usage context is unambiguous.

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