zotero_restore_items

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears the responsibility for disclosing behavior. It clearly states the effect (items move from trash to library), but it does not mention edge cases such as behavior for non-trashed keys, partial success, or any side effects. The core behavior is disclosed, but with no annotations there are minor transparency gaps.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence states the operation and its scope with no wasted words. Every word earns its place.

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?

The tool is simple, has one fully documented parameter, and an output schema exists. The description plus schema fully cover what an agent needs to invoke this tool correctly. No significant contextual information is missing.

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 input schema has 100% description coverage: item_keys is described as 'Trashed item keys to restore.' The tool description adds no additional parameter meaning, but the schema alone sufficiently documents the required parameter, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb ('Restore') and resource ('items from the trash back into the library'). This clearly distinguishes it from the related delete/empty operations among the siblings, such as zotero_delete_items and zotero_empty_trash.

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 phrase 'from the trash back into the library' provides clear context for when to use the tool: for trashed items that should be recovered. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but for a simple restore operation the usage context is adequately clear.

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