kura_rollback_snapshot

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. 'Rollback' implies a potentially destructive, state-changing operation, but the description does not state whether it overwrites current settings, requires a restart, or has irreversible effects. Critical operational context is missing.

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, concise sentence that contains no filler or repetition. It is front-loaded with the action verb and resource, making it easy to scan.

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 has no output schema, no annotations, and a sparse description. It does not explain return values, error conditions, side effects, or preconditions. For a rollback operation, which can be disruptive, this level of detail is inadequate for an agent to fully understand 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, with both parameters having descriptive text ('Kura instance name' and 'Snapshot ID to rollback to'). The description itself adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, but the schema already covers the essentials, 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 a specific action ('Rollback') and a specific resource ('configuration snapshot'), distinguishing it from related tools like kura_create_snapshot and kura_get_snapshots. It unambiguously communicates the tool's core function.

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. It does not mention prerequisites, such as the existence of a snapshot, nor does it contrast with update_configuration or create_snapshot. This leaves 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.