restore_prompts

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses that the operation is batch-scoped, that it reverses a delete_prompts call, and that it is only valid within 48 hours. It doesn't cover edge cases such as already-restored batches or failure/return behavior, but the core side effects are clear.

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 short sentences: the first names the operation, the second provides the time constraint and ID source. Every clause is load-bearing; there is no filler or restatement.

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 single-parameter restore operation, the description supplies the action, the exact batchId source, and the availability window, which is enough for an agent to select and invoke it correctly. Return-shape and failure-mode details are not described, but the low complexity and complete schema keep this from being a serious gap.

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 100% and the batchId description in the schema already states its origin ('from list_deleted_prompts or delete_prompts'). The tool description repeats this origin without adding new format, type, or validation nuance, so it stays at the baseline of 3.

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 opens with a specific verb ('restore') and a concrete resource ('a batch of recently deleted prompts'), and immediately anchors the operation to delete_prompts via 'undo a delete_prompts call'. This clearly differentiates it from the prompt-management siblings such as list_prompts, update_prompts, and delete_prompts.

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?

It explicitly states the governing condition ('48-hour grace window') and tells the agent exactly where to obtain the required batchId (list_deleted_prompts or delete_prompts response). It lacks an explicit exclusion for batches outside the window, but the grace-window condition makes the usage boundary clear.

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