undo_apply

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

The description goes beyond the lack of annotations by disclosing behavioral details: the inverse runs under its own risk tier, is audited, supports dry_run, and tokens can only be applied once. No contradictions with annotations since none are provided.

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 and well-structured: it starts with a risk label, then explains the operation, and ends with a parameter list. Every sentence adds value without 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?

Given the absence of annotations and output schema, the description covers all essential aspects: what the tool does, how it behaves, and what parameters are needed. It is complete for a tool of this complexity.

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?

Although the input schema has 0% description coverage, the description explains each parameter's purpose: undo_id, dry_run, and target. This adds meaning beyond the schema's basic definitions.

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's function: 'Apply a recorded undo by dispatching its inverse tool.' This is a specific verb+resource combination that distinguishes it from siblings like undo_list.

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 when to use the tool (to apply an undo) and provides guidance on dry_run for preview. It implies that a token can only be applied once, but does not explicitly mention alternatives or 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.