Undo all LLM changes for this specific file.

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

The description confirms the destructive nature, consistent with the destructiveHint annotation. However, it does not elaborate on side effects (e.g., reversibility, impact on file state) beyond the annotation.

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 sentence that is clear and to the point. It avoids redundancy but could benefit from slightly more detail without sacrificing conciseness.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema and annotations, the description covers the basic function. However, it lacks information on success/failure behavior and the exact scope of 'all AI changes', leaving room for ambiguity.

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 single parameter 'filepath' is not elaborated in the description or schema. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate but only implicitly references 'this specific file', adding little meaning.

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 ('discard') and the resource ('all AI changes for this specific file'). It distinguishes from siblings like 'undo_file_edit' by targeting all AI changes at once, but could be more precise about scope.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives like undo_file_edit or undo_global. The description does not specify prerequisites or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage without clear direction.

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