Farm archive

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

The description adds substantial behavioral context beyond the annotations: approval requirements for create/cancel/download, the fact that download writes a ZIP on the MCP host rather than the user's chat machine, and privacy exclusions. These are exactly the operational details an agent needs before invoking the 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 dense and front-loaded, starting with the resource and then summarizing each operation and its constraints in a compact sequence. Every sentence provides actionable information with no filler.

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 multi-operation tool with four parameters and no output schema, the description omits which parameters apply to which operations and does not describe return values. It covers operation behavior well, but an agent would still need to guess at parameter-to-operation mapping.

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 description must carry parameter meaning. It explains `output_path` for download and the operation values, but it leaves `farm_id` and `export_id` completely undocumented, so the compensation is only partial.

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 the resource as 'Farm archive operations' and then enumerates what each operation does. It is clear enough for an agent to understand this is a multi-operation archive tool, but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from any sibling tool.

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?

It classifies `list` and `status` as reads and explains that `create`, `cancel`, and `download` have approval requirements. This gives useful context for selecting an operation, but it does not state when to use this tool instead of alternatives or when not to use it.

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