restore_file_snapshot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It mentions 'instant' and 'direct file copying', but critically omits that restoring may overwrite the current file or be irreversible. For a state-modifying operation, this lack of safety/effect disclosure is a significant gap.

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?

Two concise sentences with zero redundancy. The first sentence states the action, and the second adds a meaningful detail about the method. The description is front-loaded and efficient.

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 simple tool with one parameter, the core operation is described, but the description does not explain return values, potential side effects (e.g., overwriting the file), or prerequisites (snapshot must exist). Given no output schema and no annotations, this is only minimally complete for an AI agent to invoke it 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?

The input schema already provides a complete description for the only parameter ('Snapshot ID to restore from'). The tool-level description adds no additional parameter semantics, but with 100% schema coverage 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?

Clearly states the action ('Restore') and specific resource ('a file from a snapshot'), distinguishing it from project-snapshot restore. The phrase 'Instant file restore using direct file copying' adds a concrete behavioral detail that reinforces 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?

Usage context is implied (use this tool to restore a file) but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given. The description does not mention alternatives like 'rollback_to_version' or 'restore_project_snapshot', leaving it to inference from sibling names.

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