trw_meta_tune_rollback

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses writing to an audit log and returning a dict with proposal id and content hash. However, it does not mention idempotency, reversibility, or required permissions, leaving gaps for an agent.

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 four sentences, front-loaded with the action, then usage condition, then return format. Every sentence adds value, no redundancy.

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 the tool has 3 parameters and no annotations, the description explains purpose and return but fails to describe optional parameters and prerequisites (e.g., proposal must exist and be promoted). Output schema exists but doesn't fully compensate.

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 description coverage is 0%, yet the description explains none of the three parameters. It only implies 'proposal_id' as the key parameter but omits 'state_dir' and 'audit_log_path', which have defaults and anyOf types that need clarification.

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 'Roll back a previously promoted meta-tune proposal' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes this tool from siblings by focusing on a unique operation not evident in other tool names.

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?

Explicitly says 'Use when a promoted candidate is causing regressions and you need to restore prior surface content while writing an audit log entry.' Provides clear context for use but does not mention when not to use or alternatives.

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