pve_guest_config_revert

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

No annotations are provided, but the description fully discloses behavioral traits: it is a synchronous mutation, dry-run by default, and silently skips computed keys. It also describes the return structure.

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 a single, well-structured paragraph that front-loads the purpose and behavior, then details return values. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 output schema exists (from context signals), the description covers the return structure and key behaviors. It is complete for a mutation tool with clear input and output expectations.

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%, so parameters are well-documented. The description adds value by clarifying that prior_config comes from pve_guest_config_set and that node can be auto-resolved, reinforcing the schema details.

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 clearly states it reverts a guest config to a previously captured state, referencing the companion tool pve_guest_config_set. It specifies the return structure and distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on undo functionality.

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 that it is a dry-run by default with confirm=True to execute, and that computed/read-only keys are silently skipped. It provides clear context but does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives.

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