undo.undo

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. 'Perform undo.' gives no information about whether this action is destructive, whether it requires a session lock, what state changes occur, or if it is reversible. For a mutation tool that likely alters system state, this is insufficient.

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 very short, but brevity is not conciseness when it omits critical information. Under-specification leaves the agent without enough context to use the tool correctly. A concise description should pack meaning; this one packs none.

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 has no annotations, no output schema, and a parameter with no description, the single phrase 'Perform undo.' is inadequate. The tool operates in a complex domain with many stateful siblings (undo.commit, undo.revert, undo.redo), but the description provides no context about scope, side effects, or success criteria.

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 input schema has 1 parameter (session_id) with 0% schema description coverage. The description does not mention session_id at all, forcing the agent to guess that undo applies to a specific session. The parameter's purpose and format (e.g., UUID? session number?) are entirely undocumented.

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 'Perform undo.' is vague and essentially a tautology of the tool name. It does not specify what is being undone (e.g., the last session action, a specific operation) or provide any concrete resource context. Given the large sibling list, it fails to distinguish itself from related tools like undo.revert or undo.redo.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like undo.revert or undo.commit. There is no mention of prerequisites, ordering requirements, or conditions under which undo should be invoked. The description offers zero contextual decision support.

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