restore_default_prompt

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

No annotations provided. The description uses both 'restore' and 'get', which may imply different actions (mutative vs read-only), but it does not clarify whether the tool modifies state or simply retrieves. Side effects and authorization requirements are not mentioned.

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 a single sentence, achieving conciseness, but it includes contradictory information about language filtering, reducing clarity.

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 purpose and the lack of output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what constitutes a 'default prompt', whether language is inferred, or what the output represents.

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?

Input schema has zero parameters with 100% coverage, so baseline is 4. However, the description mentions 'language [query]' which falsely implies a parameter. This mismatch misleads the agent.

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 states 'restore/get default prompt' but ambiguously includes 'language [query]' despite the input schema having no parameters. This vagueness fails to distinguish from sibling tools like 'get_prompt' or 'save_prompt'.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as 'get_prompt' or 'rollback_prompt'. Context signals and sibling names indicate potential for confusion.

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