crm_archive_association

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While 'Archive (delete)' implies a destructive operation, it doesn't clarify whether this is reversible, what permissions are required, or what happens to the association data. The parenthetical '(delete)' adds some context but doesn't fully address behavioral traits.

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 extremely concise - a single sentence that gets straight to the point with no wasted words. The parenthetical '(delete)' efficiently clarifies the meaning of 'Archive' without adding unnecessary length.

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 operation with 4 undocumented parameters and no output schema, the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain what happens after archiving, what the parameters represent, or provide any context about the association being targeted. The lack of annotations exacerbates these gaps.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage for all 4 parameters, the description provides no information about what the parameters mean or how they should be used. The description doesn't mention any parameters at all, failing to compensate for the complete lack of schema documentation.

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)') and resource ('an association between two objects'), making the purpose specific and understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like 'crm_batch_archive_associations' or 'crm_archive_object', 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 batch operations or other archive tools. With many sibling tools available, this lack of context leaves the agent guessing about appropriate use cases.

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