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

Annotations cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false), and the description adds genuine value beyond them: it discloses that no one is notified ("reaches no one"), that the action is reversible via unarchive_items, and that a Cotlet API key scoped to this app is required. The reversibility note justifies the non-destructive framing.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and scope in the first two short sentences, followed by the auth requirement. The "so it runs without asking" clause is slightly informal but earns its place by explaining the auto-approval behavior.

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?

With no output schema and a single fully-documented parameter, the description is nearly complete for a bulk mutation: it gives reversibility, notification behavior, and auth needs. It stops just short of stating the return shape or per-batch limits.

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 coverage is 100% and the single item_ids parameter already carries its own description ("Item IDs from list_items"). The description adds no format or filtering detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 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?

States a specific verb and resource ("Move items from the Inbox to the Archive") plus scope ("in bulk"). It names the sibling it pairs with (unarchive_items), so an agent can distinguish it from dext_list_items and dext_publish_items without opening a schema.

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?

Explains the operating context ("runs without asking") and flags the inverse operation (unarchive_items), giving clear context for when to invoke. It stops short of an explicit when/when-not rule against other Dext item tools.

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