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

Annotations supply idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds meaningful context: it characterizes the operation as a WRITE, asserts 'Nothing is deleted or sent', and discloses the underlying POST/DELETE endpoint. This goes beyond the annotations, though it omits any return-value or error behavior.

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?

Three compact sentences with the operation type and primary effect front-loaded, followed by the crucial 'nothing is deleted' reassurance and the endpoint. No 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 two-parameter boolean-toggle tool with full schema coverage and no output schema, the description covers purpose, both modes, safety profile, and endpoint—everything needed to invoke it correctly.

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 100% and the schema already documents both parameters, including the archived=true/false mapping. The description merely restates that mapping, so it earns the baseline for high-coverage schemas rather than adding new semantic detail.

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 ('archives a ticket... or moves it back') and even labels the operation type ('WRITE'). An agent can distinguish this from sibling mutation tools like supportbee_assign_ticket or supportbee_add_label without opening the 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 two directional modes clearly (archived=true leaves the open inbox, archived=false moves it back), which tells the agent when each value applies. It does not name an alternative tool for restoring tickets, but the mode semantics effectively cover the usage decision.

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