hive

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

todo_archive

Destructive

Archive or unarchive a todo by ID to exclude it from default lists while keeping it reachable by ID; refuses if it still blocks an incomplete todo.

Instructions

Archive a todo (or unarchive with archived=false), mirroring pad_archive. Archived todos are excluded from todo_list by default; todo_get always reaches them by id. Refuses when this todo still blocks another todo that is not completed.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "todo_id": "<todo_id>"
    },
    "name": "todo_archive"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`todo_id`	Yes
`archived`	No	Default true. Pass false to unarchive.
`project_id`	No	Different project override. Use ONLY when the user explicitly asks for another project by name; otherwise stay in the current scope, even when results are empty.

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`todo_id`	Yes
`archived`	Yes
`project_id`	Yes
`hive_notice`	No

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv1.2.2Sep 26, 2026
- addedOutput schema / properties / hive_notice
```
Added value: +{
+  "type": "string"
+}
```
First observedv1.0.0Sep 22, 2026

TDQS

A4.5/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Goes well beyond the annotations (destructiveHint, idempotentHint, readOnlyHint) by disclosing the visibility side effect: archived todos drop out of todo_list by default while todo_get still reaches them by id. It also states a hard precondition that causes refusal, which isn't derivable from the structured fields.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three tight sentences with zero filler, front-loaded with the primary action and then the effects and refusal rule. Every clause carries information the agent needs.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return values need no explanation, and the description covers the mutation's effect, visibility semantics, and failure precondition. Nothing an agent needs to invoke this correctly is missing.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 67% and both non-trivial parameters (archived, project_id) already carry their own descriptions. The description only restates the archived=false unarchive behavior and adds no syntax or constraint detail for project_id or todo_id, so it does little beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb+resource ('Archive a todo') and immediately covers the inverse operation ('unarchive with archived=false'), which an agent can act on without opening the schema. It also distinguishes itself from siblings by explicitly referencing pad_archive, todo_list, and todo_get.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives clear context for both modes of use and names the refusal precondition (todo still blocks an incomplete todo), which tells the agent when the call will fail. It stops short of naming an alternative for the delete-vs-archive decision, so it is not fully explicit about alternatives.

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