easysociable-mcp

Restore brand

restore_brand

Idempotent

Restore an archived or trashed brand to active status so it becomes selectable in brand selectors and default list queries.

Instructions

Restore a previously archived or trashed Brand back to active status. Call to unhide a brand and make it immediately selectable in brand selectors and default list queries. Alternatives: Use get_brand to inspect tokens before restoring. Idempotent state transition. Returns restored Brand with status set to active.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`brandId`	Yes	The unique identifier of the brand to restore.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`status`	No	Restored status (active).
`brandId`	No	Brand ID.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.17Oct 5, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "brandId": {
+      "description": "Brand ID.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "description": "Restored status (active).",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.16Oct 5, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / brandId / description
```
Added value: +"The unique identifier of the brand to restore."
```
First observedv0.1.13Oct 5, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description's 'Idempotent state transition' largely repeats that. However, it adds genuine behavioral context beyond annotations: the restored brand becomes 'immediately selectable in brand selectors and default list queries' and the resulting status is 'active'. Auth requirements and error behavior for a non-archived ID remain undisclosed.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the action and effect, then alternatives, then behavior. Minor redundancy: 'Idempotent state transition' and 'Returns restored Brand with status set to active' restate what annotations and the output schema already convey.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a one-required-parameter tool with an output schema, the description covers purpose, effect, and an alternative path adequately. Only error/failure handling (e.g., brand not archived) and permission requirements are absent, which is a modest gap rather than a blocking one.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100% for the single brandId parameter, so the schema already documents it fully; baseline is 3. The description only implies the ID must reference an archived/trashed brand and adds no format or lookup detail beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb ('Restore') and resource ('Brand'), plus the source state ('previously archived or trashed') and target state ('active status'). An agent can distinguish it from archive_brand, delete_brand, and get_brand without opening any schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives a clear use case ('Call to unhide a brand and make it immediately selectable') and names an alternative ('Use get_brand to inspect tokens before restoring') with its selecting condition. It lacks an explicit when-not (e.g., that archive_brand is the inverse, or what to do if the brand is not archived), so it falls short of a full 5.

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