untrash_message

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

The description explicitly adds the operational constraint 'At most 100 items.' This capacity limit is a crucial behavioral trait not covered by the annotations or schema structure, helping the agent manage expectations regarding batch operations.

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 brief and efficient, combining the primary function, the object being acted upon, and the critical operational limitation in a single block.

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?

Given the explicit annotations covering safety (destructiveHint: false) and the operational limit provided in the description, the definition is contextually complete for the agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description must carry the semantic burden. It clarifies that the 'messageId' parameter accepts either a singular ID or a list of IDs, which is a key piece of functional information.

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 defines the action (taking out/restoring) and the resource (message). It is distinct from sibling tools like trash_message (deletion) and trash_thread (different resource).

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?

While it does not explicitly list 'when to use,' the function name and description define a very narrow use case (restoring deleted items). Its role is perfectly differentiated from related trash/delete tools.

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