list_archived_chores

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It is minimal: 'List all archived chores.' It accurately indicates a read operation with no side effects, but does not disclose any potential limitations, permissions, or whether results are scoped to the user's circle.

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 a single, complete sentence with zero wasted words. Every word contributes meaning.

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 has no parameters, no output schema, and a simple listing operation, the description is fully adequate. It clearly states what the tool returns (archived chores) and leaves no obvious gaps.

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 zero parameters, and the description adds no unnecessary param info. Baseline for 0 params is 4; no need to compensate.

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 'List all archived (hidden) chores,' using a specific verb ('List') and resource ('archived chores'). It distinguishes from sibling 'list_chores' by explicitly including 'archived,' which implies that 'list_chores' lists non-archived chores.

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 description implies usage when you need to see hidden chores, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use or not use this tool versus alternatives like 'list_chores' or 'unarchive_chore.' Usage context is implied but not clarified.

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