Undo a change

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

Discloses the important side effect that the current state is snapshotted first, making undo itself undoable. This goes beyond the readOnly/idempotent/destructive hints and is exactly the kind of behavior an agent needs. It does not explain composite snapshots or stack effects, so not a 5.

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?

Three short sentences lead with the purpose, then default behavior, then safety property. No filler or schema repetition.

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 one-optional-parameter mutation, the description covers the key call-time facts: default target, snapshot source (via schema), and reversibility. The lack of any output description and no explicit redo alternative is a minor gap given no output schema.

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 covers 100% of the single optional parameter, including its source (nuvio_list_undo) and omission behavior. The prose adds no new parameter meaning beyond 'single or composite', which is not defined.

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?

States a concrete action ('Revert a previous change') and the resource ('snapshot'), and clarifies the default scope (most recent change). This separates it from redo or list-only siblings even without naming them.

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 use when a previous change should be undone and tells the caller that omitting snapshot_id targets the newest change, but it never explicitly contrasts this with nuvio_redo or says when not to use it. The schema points to nuvio_list_undo, but the description does not reinforce that workflow.

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