wealthbox.workflowSteps.revert

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It fails to mention side effects, permissions, data modifications, or reversibility. The phrase 'Revert a workflow step' offers no insight into what happens when the tool is invoked.

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 concise but under-specified. It is front-loaded with the core action but lacks essential details for correct usage. This is not appropriately sized; it is simply too terse.

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 simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description is inadequate. It does not explain the parameter, the context of a revert operation, or the expected outcome, leaving the agent without a complete basis for correct invocation.

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 defines a single numeric 'id' parameter with no description, and the tool description does not clarify what the id refers to or how it should be used. With 0% schema description coverage, the description fails to compensate for missing parameter semantics.

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 'Revert a workflow step' clearly identifies the action (revert) and the resource (workflow step), distinguishing it from the sibling 'wealthbox.workflowSteps.complete'. It is specific and unambiguous, though it doesn't elaborate on what reverting entails.

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. There is no mention of the workflow step lifecycle, prerequisites, or exclusions. The description simply states the action without contextual cues.

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