restore_history

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. 'Restore' implies mutation, but the description does not explain whether it overwrites the current pattern, affects undo history, or has side effects. Critical details are missing.

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 of 8 words, no wasted words, front-loaded with the action. Perfectly concise for the information it conveys.

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 no output schema and a simple parameter, the description is too minimal. It does not explain what 'restore' means operationally (e.g., replace current pattern vs. create new) or any behavioral context. Insufficient for an agent to invoke correctly.

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% (1 parameter, 'id', with description). The description adds no extra meaning beyond the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Restore a previous pattern from history by ID' clearly states the action (restore), the resource (previous pattern from history), and the method (by ID). It distinguishes itself from siblings like 'list_history' and 'undo' by implying a specific restoration function.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'list_history', 'undo', or 'redo'. No context about prerequisites or scenarios is given.

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