revert_subagent_run

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

No annotations exist, so the description must bear the full burden. It only states the action without disclosing side effects, destructive nature, permissions required, or behavior on invalid inputs (e.g., non-existent run_id).

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, concise sentence with no redundant words, effectively communicating the core action.

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?

The description omits important contextual details such as what 'recoverable text-file changes' means, the return value (despite an output schema existing), and any prerequisites. Given the simple parameter count, it feels incomplete.

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 0% description coverage and the description adds no meaning beyond the parameter name 'run_id'. It does not explain what a run_id is, its format, or how to obtain it.

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 specifies the action (revert) and the resource (recoverable text-file changes for one Fluxion run). It distinguishes from sibling tools like 'cancel_subagent_run' and 'run_subagent' by focusing on reverting changes rather than canceling or starting runs, providing a clear purpose.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives is provided. The description does not mention when not to use it, any prerequisites, or relationships to other tools like 'cancel_subagent_run'.

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