tor_archive_page

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

The description adds no behavioral details beyond what annotations already declare (destructiveHint=true). It doesn't mention side effects, whether the archive overwrites existing content, or any permissions needed. The annotation already signals mutation, so the description provides minimal added 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?

The description is a single sentence with no fluff or repetition. It is front-loaded with the action and target. While extremely short, it is not padded; however, it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity.

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?

Despite being a simple tool, the description is incomplete for effective use. It omits the meaning of the required 'name' parameter, any successful output details (despite an output schema being present), and lacks context on the destructive nature beyond the annotation. The description alone is insufficient for an agent to invoke it confidently.

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?

The input schema has a required 'name' parameter with zero description. The tool description does not explain what 'name' refers to (e.g., archive name, filename). With 0% schema coverage, the description completely fails to compensate or clarify the parameter's meaning.

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') and the resource ('the current page') along with the destination ('the configured local archive root'). This is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like tor_screenshot or tor_read_page.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives or any prerequisites (e.g., navigating to a page first). The description only states what it does, not when to invoke it.

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