Archive Macros (Bulk)

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

Despite annotations providing destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, the description adds crucial context: archiving is not permanent deletion, max 30 IDs per request, and returns per-ID results. This goes beyond the safety profile and gives meaningful behavioral expectations.

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 a single sentence that efficiently packages the HTTP method, endpoint, action, behavioral caveat, limit, and return format. No wasted words.

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 one-parameter mutation with annotations, the description provides essential details: endpoint, action, non-permanent nature, request limit, and per-ID results. This is sufficient for an agent to correctly select and invoke the tool.

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 schema already provides full coverage of the single 'ids' parameter with min/max constraints and description. The tool description mentions 'Max 30 IDs per request' which reinforces but does not add new meaning beyond the schema's own 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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Bulk archive multiple macros by ID' with the endpoint PUT /api/macros/archive. It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like delete_macro and unarchive_macros by clarifying that archiving is non-permanent.

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 clarifies that archiving removes macros from the active list without permanent deletion, implying when to use archive vs delete. It also specifies the bulk nature and 30-ID limit. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives like unarchive_macros or delete_macro.

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