ClockNext: archive unit

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

Despite annotations (destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true), the description adds crucial context: soft archive, data retention, continued operation of existing plans, reversibility, and absence of a separate un-archive tool. It clarifies the non-destructive nature, which goes beyond the raw annotation.

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 compact yet information-dense. Four sentences deliver purpose, effects, reversibility, and usage constraints without unnecessary words. Every sentence earns its place.

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 single-parameter, no-output-schema tool, this description fully covers the behavior, side effects, reversibility, and scope. It explains consequences to existing plans and active lists, making it complete.

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 describes the 'id' parameter as 'The unit id to deactivate (soft-archive — reversible, not a delete).' The tool description adds no new parameter-level meaning beyond the schema.

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 specific verb and resource: 'Deactivate a unit TYPE in your catalogue (sets isActive→false)'. It clearly distinguishes from sibling archive tools by specifying 'unit' and even clarifies unrelated actions like 'archiving a customer'.

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?

Explicit guidance is provided: 'Use ONLY to retire a unit you no longer sell.' It also contrasts with deletion, and points to an alternative for reactivation via clocknext_update_unit. This fully addresses when and when not to use the tool.

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