get_archive_restore_status

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful context about what the response contains (live vs. archived state of the primary record), but says nothing about failure modes for an unknown/invalid sys_id or how long restore status remains queryable.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with no filler; the resource and the returned information are both stated immediately.

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 read-only, single-parameter status lookup with no output schema, the description conveys enough to call it correctly and even hints at the returned fields. The only real gap is how to source the archive_log_sys_id, which matters because the parameter is undocumented.

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% and the single parameter (archive_log_sys_id) has no schema description. The description only implies that the argument identifies 'one archive log entry'; it does not specify the expected sys_id format or where an agent would obtain such an ID (e.g., from list_archive_rules or restore_archived_record output).

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?

States a specific verb ('Get') plus resource ('restore status of one archive log entry') and even names the key payload ('whether its primary record is live or archived'). It implicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling restore_archived_record (read status vs. perform a restore), though it never names that sibling explicitly.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus the closely related restore_archived_record, nor any stated precondition (e.g., a restore must already have been initiated). An agent must infer usage entirely from the singular 'one archive log entry' phrasing.

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