delete-crm-v3-objects-objtype-objid_objid

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. 'Archive' gives no information about side effects (e.g., whether the object is permanently deleted, if associations are affected, or if this is reversible). It fails to convey any behavioral traits beyond the bare operation name.

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 short, but this is under-specification rather than effective conciseness. A single word 'Archive' does not earn its place because it fails to communicate necessary information. It is not well-structured for an agent's use.

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 delete/archive operation with two parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is completely inadequate. It omits the object type and ID semantics, any mention of permanence, effect on existing data, or how it relates to similar archive/delete tools. The user cannot effectively invoke this tool based on the current description.

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 description coverage is 100%, with both parameters described as 'Path parameter objectType' and 'Path parameter objectId'. While these descriptions are minimal, they at least label the parameters. The description adds no additional semantic context, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 'Archive' is extremely vague and does not specify the resource or action clearly. It could refer to archiving any object, and it does not distinguish this from the many sibling archive tools like post-crm-v3-objects-objtype-batch-archive_archive. The tool name suggests delete, but 'Archive' alone is ambiguous and effectively a synonym, not a clear purpose.

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?

There is no guidance whatsoever about when to use this tool versus alternatives. No context, exclusions, or alternatives are mentioned. The description provides no usable direction for selection.

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