Create system restore

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and clearly discloses that the operation is 'Destructive' and restores 'cluster-wide Longhorn state,' which implies overwrite of current state. It also adds an operational guardrail about explicit user authorization. It does not detail exactly what state is affected or return behavior, but for a destructive operation the key warnings are present.

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?

Three sentences, front-loaded with purpose and scope, then safety guardrail, then a reference doc link. No filler; every sentence contributes.

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 description covers purpose, destructive nature, authorization, and provides a documentation link, but leaves parameters unexplained and return behavior unspecified. Given no output schema or parameter descriptions, the tool definition is somewhat incomplete for safe invocations.

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 coverage is 0% and the description does not explain the two required parameters (`name`, `systemBackup`). It references 'a system backup' but never maps that to `systemBackup` nor clarifies what `name` should be. An agent cannot reliably populate the args from this description alone.

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 states a specific verb ('Restore'), a resource ('Longhorn system'), and the scope ('cluster-wide Longhorn state'), distinguishing it from related sibling tools like systemrestore_delete or systembackup_create. The title is somewhat generic, but the description clarifies the exact operation.

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?

Provides explicit authorization gate: 'Do not call this unless the user has explicitly authorized it in this conversation — never proactively...' This gives clear context for when the tool is appropriate. It does not name alternative tools or explicitly contrast against them, but the restore semantics are unambiguous within the sibling set.

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