nyarhi_undo

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states 'reverse the mutation' without explaining side effects, irreversibility, permissions, or what happens to dependent data. This is a significant gap for a mutation-reversal tool.

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 a single sentence with no redundancy. It is front-loaded with the action verb 'reverse' and includes the essential parameter inline in code formatting. 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 has no annotations, and the description provides only the bare function. It does not explain how to obtain a sequence number, what qualifies as a mutation, or how undo interacts with the timeline/store. Even with an output schema, the description lacks critical context for safe and correct 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?

The description adds meaning to `seq` by calling it a 'timeline sequence number,' which goes beyond the schema's generic 'Seq' field. However, it does not explain the optional `store` parameter at all, and overall schema coverage is 0%. The partial explanation of the key parameter offsets the gap partially.

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 uses a specific verb 'reverse' and identifies the resource as 'the mutation with timeline sequence number `seq`.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like nyarhi_add_node or nyarhi_timeline, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 implies use for undoing a previous mutation, but it does not explicitly state when to use it, when not to use it, or reference alternatives. There's no guidance on exclusions or prerequisites, so usage context is only implied.

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