archive_record

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

No annotations provided, so description bears full burden. It discloses the mutating nature, the confirmation gate, and the preview behavior. However, it lacks details on the effects of archiving (e.g., permanence, impact on related data) and return values.

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 sentences, no redundancy, front-loaded with 'MUTATING' for immediate attention. Every sentence serves a purpose.

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 4-parameter, no-output-schema, mutating tool, the description covers key behaviors (confirm gate, archive/unarchive, preview). However, it omits error handling, return format, and post-archive state changes, leaving some gaps for a complete context.

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?

Input schema covers all 4 parameters with descriptions (100% coverage). The description reiterates the confirmation rule already present in the schema, adding little new semantic value beyond the schema itself.

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?

Description clearly states the tool archives or unarchives a record via a PUT endpoint. The specific verb 'archive' and resource distinction from siblings (no other sibling does archiving) makes purpose unambiguous.

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?

Explicitly warns not to call with confirm=true without user approval, and states that confirm=false performs a preview only. This provides clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use guidance.

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