sigma_archive_deployment

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

Annotations already indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the description does not need to restate that. The description adds the confirm=True requirement, which is a meaningful safety check beyond the annotations. However, it does not disclose whether the deletion is reversible, what happens to associated data, or if certain permissions are required.

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 one concise sentence that conveys the core action and a critical requirement. No filler words; every element earns its place. It is front-loaded with the verb and resource.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity, the presence of an output schema, and annotations that indicate destructive behavior, the description covers the essential aspects: what it does and the confirmation requirement. It lacks details on reversibility or prerequisites, but for a simple delete operation, this is sufficient.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explicitly explains the confirm parameter, noting it must be true to execute the deletion. However, policy_id is not described beyond its name, which is fairly self-explanatory but still a gap.

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 clearly states the action ('Delete') and the target resource ('a deployment policy'), with 'archive' providing additional context that it may be a soft delete. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like sigma_create_deployment or sigma_get_deployment.

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 only usage guidance is the requirement 'Requires confirm=True', which is a precondition rather than guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention when one should delete or archive a deployment policy, nor does it reference alternative tools like sigma_delete_workspace or sigma_list_deployments for context.

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