iaas_revert_disk_snapshot

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false), so the bar is lower, but the description adds nothing beyond them. It does not disclose that a revert typically overwrites current disk contents, whether the operation is asynchronous, or what happens to data written after the snapshot.

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 short but wastes a full line on a duplicated, malformed sentence ('Second day revert snapshot operation for Block device') that conveys nothing. The useful content is a fragment plus an endpoint path, with no structure around behavior.

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?

This is a mutating operation with no output schema and no annotation depth about side effects, yet the description says nothing about the result, async behavior, or required state of the disk. For a destructive-in-effect revert, that leaves an agent under-informed before invoking it.

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 description coverage is 100%, with 'id' documented as the snapshot id and 'diskId' as the disk path parameter, so the schema carries the semantics. The description adds no extra meaning about the relationship between snapshot and disk, so baseline 3 applies.

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 clear verb and resource ('Revert snapshot operation for Block device') and the POST path identifies the exact endpoint, distinguishing it from the sibling iaas_revert_machine_snapshot. The second line ('Second day revert snapshot operation for Block device') is a garbled near-duplicate that adds no clarity, keeping it from a 5.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this versus alternatives such as iaas_revert_machine_snapshot or iaas_delete_block_device_snapshot, and no prerequisites (e.g., disk must be powered off) are stated. The agent must infer usage entirely from the name and path.

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