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

The description clearly discloses that the operation is a soft delete achieved by marking the template as archived, which is important behavior not conveyed by the tool name alone. However, with no annotations, it does not mention whether this is reversible, what effects it has on list/retrieval operations, or any permission requirements.

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 that front-loads the core behavior. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or filler.

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 single-parameter mutation tool, the description is adequate but not complete. It clarifies the soft-delete semantics but omits guidance on reversibility, side effects on listing or retrieval, and when to choose this over other template operations.

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 description coverage is 0% and the description does not explain the 'id' parameter beyond the obvious implication that it identifies the template to archive. The description adds no details about the id format or where to find it, so it fails to compensate for the missing schema documentation.

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 operation: 'soft delete a template by marking it as archived.' The verb 'soft delete' and resource 'template' are specific, and this distinguishes the tool from siblings like template_update or contract_cancel, which do different things.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like template_update or template_list. 'Soft delete' implies a use case, but there is no explicit context, exclusion, or alternative mentioned.

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