rhino_undo

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

The description reveals that the tool modifies document state (undo) and that MCP tool changes are automatically grouped. Since annotations provide no readOnlyHint or destructiveHint, the description carries the burden and adequately discloses the core behavior.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and includes an important behavioral note about undo record grouping. No redundant or unnecessary text.

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 tool is simple with one parameter, and the description covers the essential behavior. An output schema exists, so return values are not required in the description. Minor improvement could be aligning with typical undo (Ctrl+Z), but it's sufficiently complete.

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 main description adds no information about the 'steps' parameter beyond what the schema already provides (number of operations to undo). Schema coverage is high, so baseline 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 the verb 'Undo' and the resource 'last operation(s) in the Rhino document'. It distinguishes from sibling rhino_redo by focusing on undo and notes that MCP tool changes are grouped into undo records.

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 implies when to use (to reverse operations) and mentions that each step reverses one undo record. It does not explicitly exclude other tools or state alternatives, but the context of undo is straightforward given the sibling rhino_redo.

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