Archive board

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

The description simply restates the operation implied by the tool name and adds no behavioral nuance beyond the annotations (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=true). It does not clarify what archiving entails (e.g., reversibility, visibility changes, or return value), so it contributes little beyond the structured metadata.

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 sentence that is front-loaded with the action and target. Every word carries meaning, and there is no filler or repetition.

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?

The tool has one parameter fully specified in the schema, and annotations declare destructive and idempotent behavior, so the structured context is strong. The description is sufficient for basic selection and invocation, though it omits when-to-use guidance and does not mention the unarchive counterpart.

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?

The input schema already fully documents board_id as a required UUID, and the description's phrase 'by UUID' is redundant with the schema. No additional parameter format, constraints, or edge-case guidance is provided. Baseline 3 applies due to 100% schema coverage.

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 uses a specific verb ('Archive') and resource ('board') with a clear target ('by UUID'), making the action unambiguous. It does not explicitly differentiate from related operations like delete_board or unarchive_board, leaving slight ambiguity about the meaning of archive vs delete.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as unarchive_board, delete_board, or update_board. There are no prerequisites, exclusions, or context cues beyond the bare action.

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