Rollback Change

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

The description explains the rollback process (reads before-snapshot, diffs, applies reverse) and notes the dependency on MIKROMCP_DATA_DIR. This adds significant context beyond the destructiveHint annotation, which only flags destructiveness.

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 two sentences: the first defines the tool's action and mechanism, the second provides key usage guidance. No unnecessary words, highly compact.

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 the rollback mechanism, dry-run preview, and required environment variable. It lacks explicit return value information but is otherwise complete for a destructive action 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?

With 100% schema coverage, the schema already describes each parameter. The description adds value by explaining dryRun's purpose (preview) and referencing the journal file, going beyond the schema's basic descriptions.

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 restores RouterOS state to before a write using a journal ID, with a specific mechanism (reads before-snapshot, diffs, applies reverse). This distinguishes it from siblings like apply_plan and plan_changes.

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 advises using dryRun=true to preview the restore plan, providing a clear usage hint. However, it does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools or state when not to use this tool.

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