driftguard_rollback

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full load, and it does disclose the destructive semantics precisely: files created after the snapshot are deleted and modified/deleted ones are restored. It does not state whether the rollback itself is reversible, whether confirmation is required, or what permissions/state the workspace must be in.

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?

One front-loaded sentence with no filler; the destructive effect follows immediately after the verb. It could be marginally tighter, but nothing is redundant.

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 single-optional-parameter destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers what matters most (what gets deleted/restored). Missing pieces are irreversibility, requisite workspace state, and any confirmation behavior.

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?

Schema coverage is 100% and the snapshotId parameter already documents its own default ('se omesso, viene utilizzato il più recente'). The description adds no further parameter meaning, which is the baseline expectation here.

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 states a specific verb and resource ('rollback immediato (Undo) ripristinando il workspace allo snapshot precedente') and spells out the effect on files created, modified and deleted. It is clearly distinguishable from create/list snapshot siblings, though it never names them.

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?

No guidance on when to choose this over alternatives (e.g. creating a new snapshot, or inspecting a snapshot before restoring), and no exclusions or preconditions. The reader can only infer usage from the verb 'rollback'.

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