glpi_reverter

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It explains that without argument it reverts the entire pending batch, and with audit_id reverts a specific operation. Lacks details on what 'pending operations' mean, whether the revert is permanent, or any success/failure feedback.

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?

Two sentences with no extraneous words. Information is front-loaded: action and scope first, then default behavior.

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 simple one-parameter revert tool, description covers main usage and parameter meaning. Could elaborate on what constitutes 'pending operations' and result indication, but is adequate for selection and basic invocation.

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?

Input schema only lists audit_id with type string/null. Description explains its role: 'por audit_id' and default behavior when omitted. This adds clarity beyond the schema, though format of audit_id is not specified.

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 tool reverts a write operation by audit_id or all pending operations in reverse order. It distinguishes from sibling CRUD tools by specifying 'reverter' as a distinct action.

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?

Usage context is implied: use to undo pending write operations. However, no explicit guidance on when to use versus other tools like glpi_listar_reversiveis (which lists reversibles) or when not to use it.

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