qb_revert_run

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

The description discloses that operations are reverted in reverse order and that dry_run allows previewing. However, without annotations, it does not explicitly state the destructive nature or irreversible consequences, leaving some behavioral uncertainty.

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 extremely concise: two sentences, no filler. It front-loads the core action and immediately provides actionable advice. Every word earns its place.

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 complexity (reverting a run) and lack of output schema or annotations, the description covers the main behavior and a key usage tip. It lacks details like prerequisites, error conditions, or what happens after reverting, but is reasonably complete for a small tool.

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?

The description indirectly covers dry_run by explaining its role, but does not describe run_log_path beyond its name. With 0% schema coverage, the description adds limited meaning; the parameter names are self-explanatory, so adequacy is borderline average.

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 the tool's purpose: reverting every operation in a run log in reverse order. The verb 'revert' and resource 'run log' are specific, and the tool is distinct from its siblings.

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?

It provides explicit guidance to use dry_run=true for previewing, which is valuable. However, it does not mention when to avoid using this tool or suggest alternatives, such as qb_list_runs to inspect the run log first.

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