Rollback Worker

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

The description explicitly discloses that bound resources (KV, R2, D1 data) are NOT reverted, which is critical behavioral information beyond the annotations. It also specifies the 100-version eligibility constraint, adding useful context.

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 two concise sentences that front-load the core action and add one key limitation. It contains no filler and every word 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?

The tool description covers the main effect, key constraints, and non-reversion of related resources, which is sufficient for a rollback operation with a well-documented schema and annotations. No output schema exists, but the description does not need to detail return values for this type of operation.

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?

All parameters are fully described in the schema, so the baseline is 3. The description reinforces the version_id constraint about the 100 most recent versions but does not add new parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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's function with a specific verb ('Roll back') and resource ('Worker') plus the mechanism ('by deploying an older version at 100% traffic'). It also implicitly distinguishes from sibling deployment tools by focusing on the rollback scenario.

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 clear context that this tool is for rolling back to an older version and highlights that only the 100 most recent versions are eligible, which helps with when to use it. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when not to use this tool, so it stops short of a top score.

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