nexo_reminder_restore

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

Clearly states the action (restore soft-deleted reminder to PENDING) and reveals the prerequisite call. No annotations exist, so the description adequately covers the behavioral aspects for this simple operation.

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 well-structured sentences with zero waste. The second sentence is properly emphasized with 'IMPORTANT' and bold, making it front-loaded and easy to parse.

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 tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description fully covers purpose, parameters, prerequisite, and expected outcome. It is complete and leaves no significant gaps.

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%, baseline 3. The description adds value by explaining the read_token's origin from `nexo_reminder_get` and its role in the restore process, going beyond the schema's description.

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 uses the specific verb 'Restore' and resource 'soft-deleted reminder' with the target state 'PENDING', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like nexo_reminder_create, nexo_reminder_delete, and nexo_reminder_get.

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?

Explicitly instructs to call `nexo_reminder_get` first and pass its READ_TOKEN, providing clear guidance on a prerequisite step. Could be improved by stating when not to use, but the instruction is actionable.

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