memory_restore

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

No annotations provided, so description fully carries the burden. Discloses clear behavioral traits: clears archive flag and tombstone note, restores visibility to multiple operations. Lacks details on permissions or error handling, but sufficient for simple mutation.

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 sentences, zero waste. Front-loaded with action and clear effects. Every sentence adds value.

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?

No output schema, but description explains return effect adequately. Covers what happens when restored. Could mention what happens if memory is not archived or if ref is invalid, but overall complete for a simple 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, all parameters have descriptions. Description adds no additional meaning beyond schema. Does not explain which parameter combination is required (ref vs title+category) or constraints.

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?

Description clearly states verb 'Restore' and resource 'previously archived memory to active set'. Distinguishes from sibling tools like memory_archive (archive) and knowledge_restore (different resource). Provides specific actions: clears archive flag and tombstone, makes visible to recall/list/audit/find_similar.

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?

Implied usage: use for restoring previously archived memories. No explicit when/when-not or alternatives. Could mention that it only works on archived memories and that the opposite is memory_archive.

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