Restore snapshot

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

Discloses risk class ('medium') and mechanism ('reverts working copy via Operation Record; never touches the original'), adding context beyond annotations. Return shape details help caller verify recovery, compensating for the lack of output schema in the input.

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?

Well-structured with clear sections: purpose, usage, key params, return shape, example, risk class. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy. Efficient and front-loaded.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (2 required params) and the presence of annotations (destructiveHint) and mention of output schema, the description fully covers what an agent needs: purpose, when to use, params, return shape, and risk. No gaps.

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 0%, so description carries burden. It explains snapshot_id ('names the target checkpoint, must exist') and provides a full example. However, doc_id is not explicitly described, though it's clear from context. Still, the description adds significant value beyond the schema.

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?

Description opens with 'Revert a document's working copy to a chosen snapshot', clearly stating the verb (revert) and resource (working copy). This differentiates it from siblings like create_snapshot and list_snapshots.

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?

Explicitly says 'When to use: undoing/rolling back to an earlier checkpoint' and provides sibling references for related actions (list_snapshots, create_snapshot), giving clear guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives.

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