undo_apply

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

The description discloses it is a write operation with medium risk, that it dispatches an inverse tool with its own risk audit, and that tokens are single-use. This is good given no annotations, but could mention return value or side effects.

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 well-structured with a header, explanatory paragraph, and bulleted arg list. Every sentence adds value, no redundancy.

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 covers purpose, usage, and parameter behavior well. However, it lacks information about the return value or output structure, which is a minor gap given no output schema.

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 description provides clear explanations for all three parameters (undo_id, dry_run, target) beyond the input schema, which lacks descriptions. This fully compensates for the 0% schema coverage.

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 the tool applies a recorded undo by dispatching its inverse tool, with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling undo_list (which lists tokens) by focusing on application.

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 explains use cases like preview with dry_run and the single-use constraint. It implicitly references undo_list for obtaining undo_id, but does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools.

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