appcrane_rollback

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that releases re-use cached images (no rebuild if retained), health-checks occur, a new deployment is recorded, and the previous one is marked rolled_back. Access restrictions are stated. Missing potential failure scenarios, but overall transparent.

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?

Three sentences: purpose, parameter behavior, and execution details. Each sentence adds unique value with no repetition. Front-loaded with the core action.

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?

No output schema, so the description should explain return values or error conditions. It mentions health-checks but not failure handling or the response format. For a mutation tool with side effects, this is a gap, but the core behavior is well-covered.

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 67% (2 of 3 parameters described in schema). The description adds context: deployment_id is sourced from list_releases, the two rollback modes, and stage as legacy alias. It compensates for the undocumented slug parameter by implying its role as the environment identifier.

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 begins with a clear verb and resource ('Roll an env back'), specifies two modes (target specific release or roll back to previous), and distinguishes from sibling tools like appcrane_deploy or appcrane_promote by its unique rollback purpose.

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 explains when to provide deployment_id vs omit it, references a source tool (appcrane_list_releases), and notes owner-only access. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives, but the usage is sufficiently clear for an agent.

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