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. It discloses the destructive nature ('Archive (delete)'), which is crucial, but lacks other behavioral details like whether archiving is reversible, what permissions are required, rate limits, or what happens to associated data. For a destructive batch operation, this is insufficient.

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 with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 destructive batch operation with no annotations, 0% schema coverage, and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It covers the basic action but misses critical context like reversibility, permissions, error handling, and parameter details, which are essential for safe agent use.

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 schema provides no parameter documentation. The description doesn't add any parameter details beyond implying 'taskIds' are needed for multiple tasks. It doesn't explain format, constraints, or limits (e.g., max batch size), leaving significant gaps. Baseline 3 is appropriate as it minimally compensates.

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 action ('Archive (delete) multiple tasks') and resource ('tasks'), making the purpose evident. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'tasks_archive' (single task) or 'tasks_batch_update' (update instead of archive), which would be needed for a perfect score.

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 like 'tasks_archive' (single task) or other batch operations. It mentions 'in a single request' which hints at efficiency for bulk operations, but lacks explicit when/when-not instructions or named alternatives.

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