revert_import

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

The description adds significant behavioral context beyond annotations: it mentions that the tool deletes entries using live SyncTokens, details the status transitions, and warns that the action is irreversible from the user's perspective. No contradiction with annotations.

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 concise (three complete sentences) with no extraneous information. It front-loads the purpose and then logically flows into status details and a usage warning. Every sentence earns its place.

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 tool's simplicity (2 required parameters with schema descriptions, presence of output schema, and comprehensive annotations), the description covers all necessary aspects: what it does, when to use it (status condition), side effects (irreversibility), and status flow. It is fully complete for an agent to correctly invoke the tool.

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 input schema already provides 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds value by specifying that companyId comes from list_companies and importId from list_imports, and that importId must refer to a finished import, which helps the agent source the correct values.

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 'Revert' and the specific resource 'finished import', explains what it does (deletes created entries) and the status transition flow. It distinguishes from sibling tools like cancel_import by specifying it works only on FINISHED or FINISHED_WITH_WARNINGS imports.

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 explicitly says to confirm with the user before calling due to irreversibility, and it specifies the valid statuses (FINISHED or FINISHED_WITH_WARNINGS). However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools for other cases, though cancel_import is implied for non-finished imports.

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