Archive template

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses that archived templates 'cannot be rendered or updated', but does not specify if the action is reversible or what happens to associated data. While it warns about consequences, it lacks completeness on the tool's safety profile.

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 consists of two concise sentences with no superfluous words. Every clause serves a purpose: stating the action, defining the target, explaining consequences, and setting usage constraints. Highly efficient.

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 low complexity (1 parameter, no nested objects, no output schema), the description covers purpose and usage but omits expected return value or error cases. With no output schema, the description could have described the result of archiving (e.g., confirmation) to improve completeness.

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 100% coverage for the single parameter, including pattern and description. The description adds no additional semantics beyond what the schema already provides, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Archive' as a specific verb and identifies the resource as 'an active template owned by this account', clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like update_template or delete_project. It also states the behavior of archived templates (cannot be rendered or updated), reinforcing purpose.

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 explicitly states when to use the tool: 'only when the user explicitly asks to remove it'. This provides a clear usage condition. However, it does not mention alternatives or when not to use it beyond that condition, which would improve guidance.

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