arm_start_rollback

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose side effects, permissions, idempotency, and return behavior. It only says 'Initiates rollback operation' without any details about whether the action is asynchronous, reversible, or what happens on failure. This is minimal behavioral disclosure for a state-changing operation.

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 short and front-loaded with the endpoint, followed by a clear one-line purpose. It contains no filler, though the endpoint line could be considered redundant given the tool name, but it still contributes to clarity.

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?

With no output schema and no annotations, the description should explain what the rollback operation returns or how it behaves, but it does not. For a potentially impactful action like a rollback, this omission makes the description incomplete for an agent to use effectively.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for all three parameters (title, headers, projectName). The description adds no additional parameter context, but the schema already provides sufficient meaning, so the baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Initiates rollback operation for CI job', specifying the verb (initiates), resource (rollback), and target (CI job). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like arm_rollback_history and arm_rollback_details, which are read/history-oriented.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as arm_quick_deploy, arm_abort_ci_job, or arm_rollback_history. There is no mention of prerequisites, use cases, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the tool name alone.

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