modal_app_rollback

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

The description only says 'redeploy,' which is a verb already implied by the tool name. It does not disclose any behavioral traits such as whether the current version is stopped, whether a new deployment is created, or if there are side effects or permission requirements. With no annotations to fill the gap, this is a serious deficiency for a mutating 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 a single, grammatically correct sentence with no redundant words. However, it is too sparse to be genuinely useful; it lacks additional context that could be provided without becoming verbose. It is concise but under-specified.

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 must carry the full burden of explaining what the tool does, what it returns, and what happens during rollback. It fails to mention any of these, leaving significant gaps for an agent to understand the tool's behavior and consequences.

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 schema provides full descriptions for all 3 parameters, so the description adds no additional meaning. Since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline score of 3 is appropriate without further elaboration in the description.

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 action (redeploy) and target (previous version of an App), making it obvious that this is a rollback operation. It distinguishes itself from most siblings like modal_app_stop or modal_app_logs, though it does not explicitly differentiate from modal_app_rollover.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as modal_app_rollover or modal_app_history. There are no prerequisites, conditions, or exclusion scenarios mentioned, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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