preset_extract_archive

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

With no annotations, the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. It mentions the archive must be on disk and rar unsupported, but lacks details on success/failure, overwriting behavior, destination default, or supported compression formats like .tar.gz. Minimal behavioral context.

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?

A single sentence that is front-loaded with the core action and constraints. Every word adds value. There is no fluff, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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?

Given 2 parameters with no schema descriptions, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is incomplete. It fails to explain the destination parameter, return values, error handling, or extraction behavior. For an AI agent, this is insufficient for correct invocation.

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%, so the description should explain both parameters. It clarifies the 'archive' parameter must be a zip/tar file path, but says nothing about the 'destination' parameter (its purpose, format, or default). The description does not compensate for the missing schema descriptions.

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 tool extracts zip/tar archives already on disk and explicitly excludes rar. This differentiates it from potential sibling tools. The verb and resource are specific, but it doesn't explicitly distinguish from other extraction methods.

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 usage when a zip/tar archive is on disk and rar is not supported, but it does not provide explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it mention alternatives or prerequisites.

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