wikijs_restore_page

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It correctly indicates this is a mutation operation requiring specific configurations. However, it does not mention if the restore is reversible, what happens to the current page version, or any 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?

The description is two sentences: the first states the core function, the second adds key usage conditions. No extraneous information, fully front-loaded.

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 absence of an output schema, the description should indicate what the tool returns (e.g., success object or nothing). It does not cover the return value or confirmation step. However, it sufficiently covers the input requirements for a mutation tool.

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 description adds meaning beyond the input schema: it explains that versionId should come from page history and clarifies the confirm parameter's conditionality. Since schema coverage is 100%, the description supplements it effectively.

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 clearly states the action ('Restore a page to a previous version') and the resource ('page'), making the purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes from sibling tools like wikijs_get_page_version (read-only) and wikijs_update_page (edit current content).

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?

The description explicitly mentions required environment variable (WIKI_MUTATIONS_ENABLED=true) and optional permission (manage:pages), and explains the confirm parameter's role. However, it does not explicitly state when to avoid using this tool (e.g., if mutations are disabled).

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