Apply historical Release restoration as Working

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

The description adds some behavioral detail beyond annotations by mentioning 'idempotency' and 'stale-state checks', which are not explicitly covered by the annotations. However, it does not explain the implications of these checks or that it is a write 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?

The description is a single sentence without redundancy or fluff. It is concise and to the point, though somewhat cryptic.

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?

The description is minimal and does not provide sufficient context about the operation, its input/output, or its place within the broader tool family. Key details such as what a 'release' is, what 'restore' entails, or the expected output are missing.

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 schema has no parameter descriptions, and the tool description does not explain the meaning of any of the four required parameters. The parameter names are suggestive but not defining, leaving users to guess their roles.

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 'Apply the exact cached plan' but does not specify what a 'restore release' actually does. It is not a tautology but lacks a clear, specific verb-resource combination that distinguishes it from other apply_* tools.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus the many sibling plan/apply tools. There is no mention of scenarios, prerequisites, or alternatives.

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