Unarchive List

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

With no annotations provided, the description itself must carry behavioral disclosure. 'Unarchive (reopen)' clearly indicates a state change from closed to open, but it does not mention prerequisites, permission needs, idempotency, error behavior, or the effect on an already-open list. Some gaps remain for a mutation tool.

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 front-loaded sentence that earns its place with both a direct verb and a clarifying synonym. There is no filler or redundant restatement of the tool name.

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 the tool's low complexity—one required parameter, no nested objects, no output schema—the description provides enough context to understand the operation. It could mention the return value or behavior when the list is already open, but these are minor omissions for such a simple action.

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 only parameter, listId, is already fully described as 'The ID of the list to unarchive'. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 'Unarchive' with a clarifying parenthetical 'reopen' and identifies the exact resource: a closed Trello list. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like archive_list, create_list, 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?

The phrase 'a closed Trello list' gives clear contextual guidance on when to invoke this tool. It does not explicitly name alternatives or list when-not-to-use conditions, but the state-based condition is sufficient for a focused unarchive operation.

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