Restore backup

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states 'THIS OVERWRITES ALL CURRENT DATA and restarts the application,' which is a critical destructive side effect. It also discloses the privilege requirement ('Superuser only') and advises extreme caution.

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 compact and every sentence earns its place. The core function is stated first, followed by the critical destructive warning and the superuser restriction. No filler or redundant 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?

For a single-parameter destructive tool with no output schema, the description covers everything needed for correct invocation: what it does, the key parameter meaning, the destructive consequence, the restart behavior, and the privilege requirement. There is no meaningful gap given the tool's complexity.

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%, and the schema already describes 'key' as the backup file key/name. The description adds the notion that the backup file must already exist ('existing backup file'), but this is a minor extension. Since the schema handles the parameter semantics, the description provides only marginal additional 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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Restore the instance from an existing backup file.' This clearly distinguishes restore_backup from sibling backup tools like list_backups, create_backup, upload_backup, and delete_backup. The warning sentence adds scope and risk profile rather than obscuring the purpose.

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 context on when to use the tool: when restoring from an existing backup. It also provides critical usage restrictions: 'Use with extreme caution. Superuser only.' It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the destructive nature and distinctive restore action make the appropriate use case unambiguous.

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