Archive Card

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

The description simply states the action without explaining side effects, reversibility, or consequences such as the card being hidden from boards. With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure and does not meet it.

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 with no wasted words. It is appropriately sized for a simple tool, though it slightly under-specifies behavioral context.

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 one-parameter tool with a fully documented schema, the description is minimally sufficient to invoke the tool correctly. However, the lack of annotations and any mention of reversibility or relationship to unarchive_card leaves the context somewhat thin.

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 cardId parameter is already documented as 'The ID of the card to archive'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline score of 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 uses a specific verb ('Archive') and a clear resource ('a Trello card'), and the parenthetical '(close)' adds useful clarification. It is immediately distinct from siblings like delete_card and unarchive_card.

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?

No guidance is provided about when to archive a card versus using related tools such as delete_card, move_card, or unarchive_card. The intended context is only implied by the tool name and description, not stated.

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