archive_reportsArchive several reports by ID in one call. They go to the archive, not away — list_archive shows them and restore_from_archive brings them back.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| report_ids | Yes | Report IDs to archive (from list_reports) |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| data | No | Confirmation of the archive and how many reports it covered. | |
| success | Yes | True when the call succeeded. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / $schemaRemoved value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"Input schema / properties / idsRemoved value: -{
- "description": "Array of report IDs to archive (from list_reports)",
- "items": {
- "type": "string"
- },
- "type": "array"
-}Input schema / properties / report_idsAdded value: +{
+ "description": "Report IDs to archive (from list_reports)",
+ "items": {
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+}Input schema / requiredPrevious value: -[
- "ids"
-]New value: +[
+ "report_ids"
+]Output schema / $schemaRemoved value: -"http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#"Output schema / properties / success / descriptionPrevious value: -"True when the call succeeded. A failure comes back as an error result instead."New value: +"True when the call succeeded."Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+ "additionalProperties": false,
+ "properties": {
+ "data": {
+ "description": "Confirmation of the archive and how many reports it covered."
+ },
+ "success": {
+ "description": "True when the call succeeded. A failure comes back as an error result instead.",
+ "type": "boolean"
+ }
+ },
+ "required": [
+ "success"
+ ],
+ "type": "object"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already flag destructiveHint=true, and the description adds meaningful context that archiving is reversible and not permanent deletion, pointing to the complementary tools for viewing and restoring. This goes beyond the structured annotation and helps the agent understand the full impact of the 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?
Two short sentences with no wasted words. The purpose is stated first, followed by a clarifying note about the effect. It is well-structured and immediately understandable.
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 with an output schema present, the description covers the action, the scope, and the behavioral nuance (reversibility). An agent has everything needed to decide when to call it and what to expect, without needing to inspect the 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 sole parameter report_ids is fully described in the schema with 'Report IDs to archive (from list_reports)'. The tool description adds no further detail about the parameter, so with 100% schema coverage 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 states a clear verb (archive), resource (reports), and scope (multiple reports by ID in one call). It distinguishes itself from the singular sibling archive_report by emphasizing batch operation, and clarifies the semantic that items are not deleted ('not away').
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?
It clearly indicates the tool is for archiving multiple reports in a single call, and the second sentence implies when it is appropriate by noting that archived reports remain accessible via list_archive and restore_from_archive. However, it does not explicitly say to use archive_report for single reports, though the plural/singular distinction is implied.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.