pve_rollback

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

Discloses destructive nature, default dry-run, confirmation requirement, and async return of UPID. With no annotations, carries full burden; these details adequately inform the agent about behavior and safety.

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?

Two concise sentences, each valuable. First sentence states action and consequence; second explains dry-run, confirmation, and async behavior. No unnecessary words.

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?

Covers critical safety aspects (destructive, dry-run) and async return, but misses details on parameters like vmid, snapname, kind, node. Output schema may compensate for return value details, but parameter documentation is incomplete.

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 describes 6 parameters but only proximo_target has a description (17% coverage). Description only explains 'confirm' explicitly; vmid, snapname, kind, node are not elaborated. Does not compensate sufficiently for low schema coverage.

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 clearly states the tool rolls back a guest to a snapshot and discards all changes since it. The verb 'roll back' and resource 'guest/snapshot' are specific, and the tool is distinct from siblings like snapshot create/delete or guest config revert.

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 explicit guidance on when to use vs alternatives (e.g., restore from backup). The description mentions dry-run by default and confirm flag but does not contrast with other recovery tools.

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