templates_revert

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

With no annotations, the description bears full weight. It marks the operation as [WRITE] and mentions the revert action, implying destructive behavior, but lacks detail on side effects, reversibility, or impact on other workspace changes. The confirm parameter adds a small safety disclosure.

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 a single, focused sentence plus the crucial flag notice. No extraneous words, and the key information is front-loaded.

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 simple revert operation, the description covers the essential context: the action, scope, and required flags. It could mention that only the specified template is affected, but overall it is complete enough given the schema's parameter documentation.

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 100% description coverage, so the parameters are already well-documented. The description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 action ('Revert'), the resource ('GTM template'), and the scope ('workspace changes back to last container-version state'), distinguishing it from other templates operations like update or delete.

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 mentions required flags (GTM_MCP_ENABLE_WRITES=true and confirm=true) but does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it specify when not to use it.

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