Revert volume to snapshot

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses the destructive nature of the operation, the irreversible effect of discarding changes, and the need for explicit user authorization. This goes well beyond the schema.

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?

Three tightly focused sentences with no filler. The action and consequence come first, the safety warning second, and the documentation link last. Every sentence 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?

For a destructive two-parameter operation with no output schema and no annotations, the description is nearly complete: it covers the operation, the impact, the consent requirement, and points to docs. It falls just short of explicitly defining the parameters and any prerequisites such as the volume being in a valid state for revert.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must supply parameter meaning. It implies that 'name' is the volume and 'snapshotName' is the snapshot, but it does not explicitly map or clarify either parameter. The operation sentence adds some context, but the description could be clearer about which identifier refers to what.

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 a specific verb and resource: 'Revert a volume to a snapshot,' with the meaningful consequence 'discarding all changes made since.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling snapshot tools like volume_snapshot_create, volume_snapshot_delete, and volume_snapshot_purge.

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 gives an explicit, high-stakes usage condition: do not call unless the user has explicitly authorized it in this conversation, and never proactively, speculatively, or as a side effect of another task. This is strong when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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