ck_memory_archive

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

Annotations provide safety info (not read-only, not idempotent, not destructive). Description adds behavioral context: marks as archived, not deleted, and is a write operation, enhancing transparency beyond annotations.

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?

Description is concise (5 sentences), front-loaded with purpose, explains effect, input, usage, and alternative. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 purpose, usage, parameter details, and alternatives. With output schema present, return values are explained elsewhere. Missing error conditions or permissions, but sufficient for an archive tool given annotations.

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 67%. Description adds meaning for memory_id (explains its origin). session_id and project_root rely on schema descriptions, but the description compensates for the missing memory_id description.

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 it archives a memory record to exclude it from search results, specifies it's a write operation not deletion, and distinguishes from sibling tools like ck_memory_record and ck_memory_search.

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?

Explicitly advises when to use (stale, superseded, no longer guiding) and when to use alternative (update via ck_memory_record), providing clear usage context.

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