uvcs_undo_confirm

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

Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false, readOnlyHint=false, but the description adds the crucial context that the effect is irreversible and gated on human approval of the exact prepared payload. It does not spell out what specifically gets discarded beyond 'pending changes', which keeps it from a 5.

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?

Four short sentences, front-loaded with the effect and irreversibility before the gating requirement. There is mild redundancy between 'Requires prepare/confirm' and 'Confirms and executes a prepared operation', which costs a point but costs nothing important.

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 two-parameter, fully-schema-documented destructive confirm tool with no output schema, the description supplies effect, scope, irreversibility, and the approval gate. Only the concrete consequence of an accidental call (what state is lost) is left implicit.

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 description coverage is 100% and both parameters (token, confirmPhrase) are documented in the schema, including the exact literal for confirmPhrase. The description adds no parameter-level detail, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

Names a specific verb and resource ('Irreversibly undo pending changes for one path') and scopes it to a single path within the selected workspace. The phrase 'Confirms and executes a prepared operation' separates it from the prepare sibling without the agent needing to open the schema.

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?

States explicit preconditions (requires prepare/confirm, user must have reviewed the payload and approved this exact operation) and an explicit exclusion (workspace-root undo is forbidden). That covers when to call, when not to call, and the sibling it depends on.

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