Undo Last Operation

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

The description goes beyond annotations by stating that no arguments are required and that it returns success status and a state summary. It also reveals the mutation ('Reverts') despite the destructiveHint being false. It does not mention potential clearing of redo history, but given the simplicity, the transparency is adequate.

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 two sentences long, entirely front-loaded with the core purpose, and contains no filler. Every sentence adds value.

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?

For a tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description sufficiently covers input (none), behavior (revert last operation), and output (success + state summary). It could mention edge cases like multiple undos or interaction with design_redo, but it is not necessary for basic use.

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 tool has zero parameters, which earns a baseline of 4. The description adds 'No arguments required', but that is already obvious from the empty schema. Still, it confirms the expected usage.

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 states 'Undo the last design operation' – a specific verb ('undo') with resource ('design operation') and scope ('last'). It clearly differentiates from the sibling design_redo, which performs the opposite operation.

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 implies when to use it (after a mistake or unwanted change) and notes 'Reverts the most recent change'. It does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusion criteria, but the context is clear enough for a simple undo tool.

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