redoRe-apply the most recently undone mutation by restoring the per-badge snapshot that an undo removed.
Re-apply the most recently undone mutation, restoring the per-badge snapshot that undo removed. Use when: an undo was issued by mistake and the change should be restored. Do NOT use when: reverting a new change — use undo.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Describes the mutating effect of restoring a removed snapshot, going beyond the readOnlyHint:false annotation. Does not mention failure cases or lack of undo history, but core behavior is clear.
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 compact sentences deliver purpose, scope, and usage boundaries without redundant wording.
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?
Fully sufficient for a zero-parameter mutation tool: it explains what it does, when to use it, and when not to use it, with no output schema requiring further detail.
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?
No parameters exist, so there is nothing extra to document. Baseline for zero-parameter tools is appropriately strong.
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?
Clearly states the action (re-apply), the target (most recently undone mutation/per-badge snapshot), and distinguishes it from undo by explicitly naming the counterpart.
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?
Provides explicit use-when and do-not-use-when guidance, making the appropriate calling context unambiguous.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.