undo_last_apply

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'undo,' but fails to mention side effects (e.g., whether it is destructive, if there's an undo history limit, or what happens if there are no edits to undo). The optional instance_id parameter's role is also unexplored.

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 fluff. It is appropriately front-loaded, though its brevity sacrifices important detail.

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 presence of an output schema and only one optional parameter, a slightly richer description would suffice. However, the description omits crucial context about undo scope, error behavior, and when to use this tool, making it incomplete for a mutating operation.

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 one parameter, instance_id, but the description provides zero explanation of what it does or how it affects the undo operation. With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate but doesn't.

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 the action ('undo') and the target ('most recent edit') in Blender. However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like rollback_to_revision, which also reverts changes, so it misses the chance to differentiate.

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 this tool versus alternatives like rollback_to_revision or other undo mechanisms. The description only states what it does, not when it is appropriate.

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