transformations_revert

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

No annotations provided; description bears full burden. It notes this is a write operation and requires confirmation, but lacks details on side effects, permanence, permissions, or rate limits. Adequate but minimal.

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 sentence with a clear [WRITE] tag, front-loading the key information. No extraneous words, highly efficient.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description covers essential purpose and a key condition. However, it omits details like return value, error behavior, and the purpose of the fingerprint parameter, leaving gaps.

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 coverage is 100% with parameter descriptions. The description adds value by reinforcing the confirm parameter's requirement and the overall write enable condition, providing context beyond schema.

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 tool reverts workspace changes to a GTM transformation to its last container-version state. It uses specific verb 'Revert' and resource 'GTM transformation', distinguishing it from other revert tools in the sibling list.

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 explicitly states prerequisites (GTM_MCP_ENABLE_WRITES=true and confirm=true) and the context (revert workspace changes). It does not discuss when not to use or alternatives, but the context is clear enough.

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