Undo Chore

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It does not explain side effects (e.g., whether points are revoked, if the completion record is deleted), permissions required, or behavior when there is no prior completion. This is a significant gap for a mutation-like undo operation.

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, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It communicates the essential purpose efficiently.

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 one-parameter tool, the description provides the minimum viable information. However, it lacks behavioral context around side effects, failure cases, and user scoping. The presence of an output schema somewhat reduces the need to describe return values, but the operation's semantics are still under-specified.

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 fully describes chore_id as 'The ID of the chore' (100% coverage). The description adds no extra semantic meaning beyond this, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 'Undo the last completion of a chore' clearly states the specific action (undo) and target (last completion of a chore). It distinguishes from siblings like complete_chore and skip_chore. Minor ambiguity exists about the scope of 'last' (per user, per chore, globally), but the overall purpose is clear.

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 implies the tool is used to reverse a previous completion, but it does not explicitly state when to use it, when not to, or name alternative tools. Guidance is minimal, relying on the verb 'undo' to convey intent.

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