tasks_batch_archive

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It indicates this is a destructive operation ('Archive (delete)'), which is helpful, but doesn't mention whether archiving is reversible, what permissions are required, whether there are rate limits, or what happens to archived tasks. For a batch destructive operation, this leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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, efficient sentence that front-loads the core action ('Archive (delete) multiple tasks') and adds the batch context ('in a single request'). Every word serves a purpose with zero redundancy or unnecessary elaboration.

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 batch destructive operation with no annotations, 0% schema description coverage, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't address critical context like error handling, confirmation requirements, side effects, or return values. The agent lacks sufficient information to use this tool safely and effectively.

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?

The schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It implies the parameter is task IDs for archiving, which aligns with the schema's 'taskIds' array parameter. However, it doesn't specify format requirements, maximum batch size, or validation rules. The description adds basic meaning but doesn't fully compensate for the 0% schema coverage.

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 verb ('Archive (delete)') and resource ('multiple tasks'), making the purpose unambiguous. It specifies batch operation ('in a single request'), which distinguishes it from individual task operations like tasks_archive. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other batch operations like tasks_batch_update.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention when batch archiving is preferable to individual archiving (tasks_archive), nor does it clarify prerequisites, permissions, or constraints. The sibling tools list shows multiple batch operations, but the description offers no comparative context.

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