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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, non-destructive, and closed-world, so safety is covered. The description adds only the raw Fortnox endpoint (GET /3/archive) and a docs URL, nothing about pagination behavior, whether a folder tree or flat file list is returned, or how path vs fileid interact.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the action; the second is a bare API/doc pointer. There is no padding, though the second sentence contributes little beyond a reference link.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be explained, but for a 7-parameter listing tool with zero required params the description does not resolve what the call actually returns or how to page through results. The ambiguity between listing folders and retrieving a file is a real gap given the sibling set.

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?

At 57% schema coverage, three of seven parameters (page, limit, offset) are undocumented anywhere, and the description supplies no compensating meaning. It also does not clarify the relationship between 'path' (folder name) and 'fileid', which is the key ambiguity for calling this correctly.

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 verb 'Retrieve' plus resource 'folder or file' gives a rough idea, but it conflicts with the tool name list_archives and does not distinguish this from close siblings like get_archive, read_archive_file, or download_archive_file. An agent cannot tell whether this lists archive entries or fetches file content.

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?

There is no statement of when to use this tool rather than get_archive, list_inboxes, read_archive_file, or download_archive_file. The only context offered is an API endpoint reference, which does not help tool selection.

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