discard_pending_edits

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must convey behavioral traits. It correctly indicates the destructive nature of the operation ('throw away,' 'reset'). However, it does not mention potential side effects like irreversibility or impact on other branches, leaving some gaps.

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?

Two concise sentences with no wasted words. The key action is front-loaded, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

For a tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description is complete enough. It explains the operation and when to use it. Sibling tools provide related context, and the description aligns with the expected behavior.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so schema description coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter details because none exist. Baseline for no parameters is 4.

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 discards staged edits and resets to the last fetched base catalog. The verb 'throw away' and resource 'staged edits' / 'working copy' are specific. It distinguishes from siblings like 'commit_and_push' (which commits) and 'list_pending_edits' (which lists).

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?

Explicitly states 'Useful when you want to start over,' providing clear context for when to use the tool. While it does not list when-not or alternatives, the single-sentence guidance is sufficient for a simple destructive operation.

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