iaas_revert_machine_snapshot

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false, idempotentHint=false, which is the only behavioral signal available. The description adds nothing about what state the machine is left in after reverting, whether the operation is asynchronous, or whether it discards current disk state — all critical for a revert operation the agent is told is non-destructive.

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 lines, one of which is a near-duplicate of the first with the nonsensical prefix 'Second day' — wasted tokens in the most prominent position. The actual endpoint, the only useful non-redundant content, is relegated to the last line.

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?

With 100% schema coverage, 3 required params, no output schema, and annotations carrying the safety profile, the definition is functionally callable. But it omits everything an agent needs to reason about consequences of a revert, which is a meaningful gap for a state-changing machine operation.

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%, so id, snapshotId, and apiVersion are each documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax, format, or constraint detail beyond restating the resource name and path — 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?

States the verb+resource ('Revert snapshot ... for machine') and includes the REST path, so the intent is discernible. However, the second sentence 'Second day revert snapshot operation for machine' is meaningless filler that adds no information, and nothing distinguishes it from siblings like iaas_revert_disk_snapshot or iaas_create_machine_snapshot.

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 use this versus iaas_revert_disk_snapshot, iaas_create_machine_snapshot, or the power/reset machine operations. No prerequisites (machine must be powered off? snapshot must be current?) and no exclusions are stated.

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