archive_notification

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. States reversibility, a key behavioral trait. Could add more detail (e.g., permissions, effect on unread count) but sufficient for a simple archive action.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with verb and object, no unnecessary words. Perfectly concise for the operation.

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?

Covers core behavior but misses parameter context and explicit usage guidance. With sibling notification tools, more context on how archive fits in the notification lifecycle would be helpful. Adequate for a simple tool but lacking 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so description needed to explain parameters, but it doesn't mention them at all. Parameter names are somewhat self-explanatory, but lacking context for 'workspace' and confirming 'id' is notification ID.

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?

Clearly states action 'Archive' and resource 'notification', with clarification that it removes from inbox and is reversible. Distinguishes from siblings like mark_notification_read or delete_notification.

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?

Implies usage for archiving notifications but no explicit when-to-use vs alternatives like mark as read or delete. Mentions reversibility, which hints at safe use, but no guidance on prerequisites or exclusions.

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