Rollback Multi-file Patch

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint: true, so the description's mention of 'backup journal' adds some context about the mechanism. However, it does not discuss reversibility, permissions, or side effects beyond restoration.

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?

Single sentence of 8 words, no fluff, front-loaded with the action. Every word is necessary.

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 tool with no output schema and minimal annotations, the description lacks crucial context: what a backup journal is, prerequisites, error states, or whether the operation is reversible. Incomplete for safe usage.

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 has 0% description coverage, and the tool description does not mention the required parameter patchsetId or its meaning. The agent receives no guidance on what value to provide.

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 uses the verb 'Restore' matching the title's 'Rollback', and specifies the resource as 'every file from the patch-set backup journal.' It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like patchset.apply by indicating a reversal operation.

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 given on when to use or not use this tool versus alternatives like patchset.apply or patchset.validate. The description only states what it does, not the context of use.

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