Archive List

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

With no annotations, the description must carry full behavioral disclosure. It conveys that the tool mutates state (archives/closes a list) but does not disclose side effects, such as what happens to cards in the list, whether the action is reversible, or any permission requirements.

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 sentence with no filler and the core action is front-loaded. It is appropriately terse for a simple one-parameter tool, though it could have included a brief usage note without becoming verbose.

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 simple one-parameter mutation with no output schema and no annotations, the description reaches minimum viability: it identifies the operation and the required ID. However, it omits behavioral context such as side effects on contained cards and reversibility, which would make an agent's invocation fully informed.

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% and the listId parameter already has a clear description, so the tool description adds no new parameter detail. Baseline of 3 applies because the schema does the documentation work; no format or source guidance is provided.

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 action ('Archive (close)') and a resource ('a Trello list'), making the operation identifiable. It differentiates from archive_card by naming the list as target, though it does not explicitly contrast with sibling tools like unarchive_list or archive_all_cards.

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 choose this tool over alternatives; it only defines the action. An agent is not told to use it when wanting to close a list, nor to avoid it if they want to archive cards or restore a list via unarchive_list.

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