plasticity_redo

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=true, so the mutation profile is covered. The description adds no behavioral context beyond that: it does not say what state is affected, whether the redo stack must be non-empty, or how this interacts with document history. Nothing is contradicted, but little value is added.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with zero waste; the scope qualifier 'most recent undone' is stated immediately.

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 mutation tool with an undocumented required parameter, no output schema, and no annotation coverage of redo-stack semantics, the one-sentence description is not complete enough to call the tool reliably. Failure conditions and the meaning of 'revision' are missing.

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 0% for both parameters. The description does not explain the required 'revision' string (a revision identifier? the undone revision?) or the optional 'intent' field, so an agent gains no semantic guidance beyond the bare schema types.

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?

States a specific verb (redo), resource (document edit), and scope (most recent undone). It is clearly distinguishable from its sibling plasticity_undo, though it does not name that sibling explicitly.

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?

Redo is a well-understood standard operation, so usage is largely implied, but the description offers no explicit condition such as requiring a prior undo, no failure behavior when the undo stack is empty, and no reference to the undo alternative.

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