undo_apply

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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses that the tool is a write operation with medium risk, that the token can only be used once, and the dry_run behavior. It also mentions the governance of the inverse tool. This is transparent for the agent.

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 concise with a clear front-loaded summary, followed by relevant behavioral notes and parameter explanations. No fluff, but could be slightly more structured.

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 3 parameters, the description covers behavior, parameters, and usage. It lacks explicit return value detail but is sufficient for an agent to select and 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 0%, but the description explains each parameter: undo_id is from undo_list or _undo_id, dry_run previews, target passes through. This adds meaningful context beyond schema titles.

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 clearly states it 'Apply a recorded undo by dispatching its inverse tool.' This specifies the action (apply) and the resource (recorded undo), and it is distinct from siblings like undo_list which lists undos.

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 guidance on when to use dry_run, notes that a token can only be applied once, and explains that the inverse runs through its own governed tool. However, it does not explicitly compare to other tools or say when not to use it.

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