item_archive

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses key behavior: item is moved to archive, hidden, not deleted. However, it does not mention whether the action is reversible, required permissions, or side effects like data retention.

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 clear sentence that directly states the action and outcome. No wasted words; it is optimally concise.

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 2 required parameters, 100% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description explains the tool's effect (archiving vs deleting) sufficiently. It does not cover return values or error conditions, but for a simple archive operation this is acceptable.

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% with clear parameter descriptions for itemId and vaultId. The description adds no extra parameter meaning beyond the schema, so baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 action 'Archive an item in a 1Password vault', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like item_delete by noting that archiving moves to archive rather than permanently deleting.

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 implies when to use this tool by contrasting archiving with permanent deletion: 'moved to the archive and hidden from regular views, rather than being permanently deleted'. It provides clear context but does not explicitly list when-not-to-use or alternative tools.

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