archive_memory

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that the action is reversible and what changes (stops appearing in recall/inject). However, missing details on required permissions or impact on other operations.

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 efficient sentences that convey purpose, effect, and reversibility with no fluff.

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 simple tool with one parameter and no annotations or output schema, the description is fairly complete. It explains the behavioral change and reversibility. Could optionally mention if there's any confirmation step.

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 100% with good parameter description. The description adds 'stops appearing in recall and inject lists' which complements the schema but does not significantly extend beyond it.

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?

Clearly states the tool archives a memory and explains the effect (stops appearing in recall/inject, remains on-chain, reversible). Distinguishes from siblings like delete_project and unarchive_memory.

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?

Implied usage through explanation of effect (archive vs. delete), but no explicit when-to-use or alternatives guidance. More context could help distinguish from unarchive_memory or update_memory_tags.

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