update_restore_point

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It discloses max lengths for name and description and the requirement for at least one field, but does not detail error behavior (e.g., if restore point does not exist) or confirm no unintended side effects.

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?

Extremely concise: two-sentence intro followed by a bullet list of arguments. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is front-loaded with the purpose.

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 tool's simplicity, the description covers essential aspects: purpose, required parameters, optional parameter constraints, and the rule about at least one field. An output schema exists, so return values are not required. Missing error handling details, but acceptable.

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 0%, so description adds significant value beyond the schema. It explains each parameter's role, notes constraints (max chars), and clarifies that at least one of name or description is required.

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?

Clearly states 'Rename and/or update the description of a restore point,' specifying the verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like create_restore_point and delete_restore_point.

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?

Explicitly states that at least one of name or description must be provided, guiding usage. However, it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool over alternatives, such as when not to use it.

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