Ürün Arşivle / Arşivden Çıkar

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

With no annotations, the description fully explains the effect: archived products become invisible but are not deleted, and unarchived ones reactivate. It also mentions the batch result checking method, though it omits potential side effects on pricing or inventory.

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?

Three concise sentences with no redundant information. The key action and constraints are front-loaded, making it efficient for an AI agent to parse.

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 batch archive/unarchive tool, the description covers the main behavior, limits, and post-action step. It lacks error handling or rate limit details, but overall it is adequately complete for the tool's complexity.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description compensates by explaining the items array structure and the meaning of the archived boolean (true=archive, false=unarchive), adding value beyond the raw schema.

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 explicitly states the action (archive/unarchive) and resource (products), clarifying that archiving makes products invisible but not deleted, distinguishing it from deletion tools.

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 a usage limit (max 1000 items) and instructs to check results with a specific sibling tool, offering practical guidance. However, it does not explicitly differentiate when to use this tool over alternatives.

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