backlog

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It adds valuable context about the data organization (quarterly segments) and return format (JSON array with example path), but omits explicit safety declarations (read-only nature), authentication requirements, or rate limiting that a zero-annotation mutation-risk tool should disclose.

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?

Two sentences with zero waste. First sentence front-loads the return value with concrete example. Second sentence provides actionable cross-reference. Every word serves selection or invocation clarity.

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?

Absence of output schema places burden on description to explain return values, which it satisfies by specifying JSON array format, path structure, and quarterly segmentation. Adequately complete for a discovery tool, though could briefly mention if empty archives are included or pagination behavior.

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?

Zero input parameters present; baseline score 4 applies per rubric. The description correctly omits parameter discussion since none exist, focusing instead on the return value semantics.

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?

Specific verb 'Return' plus resource 'archive segment paths' clearly defines the operation. Explicitly contrasts with sibling task_archive_load by stating this tool returns paths while the sibling is used to 'inspect archived tasks', clarifying the list-vs-load distinction.

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?

Provides explicit workflow guidance: 'Use task_archive_load with the segment name to inspect archived tasks.' This clearly indicates the tool's place in the sequence (discovery before inspection) and names the exact alternative for the next step.

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