archive_cycle

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

With no annotations and a one-line description, the agent cannot infer behavior beyond 'archive'. No mention of destructiveness, reversibility, permissions, or side effects, leaving a critical gap.

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 extremely concise (3 words). While brevity is valued, it omits helpful contextual details that could fit in the same space.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description fails to clarify how archiving differs from deletion or reversal. Sibling tools like unarchive_cycle recontextualize the action, but the description itself is incomplete.

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 coverage is 100% with clear descriptions for both parameters (project_id and cycle_id). The tool description adds no extra meaning, so a baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Archive a cycle.' clearly identifies the action (archive) and resource (cycle), but does not differentiate from sibling tools like delete_cycle or unarchive_cycle, which have similar scope.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., delete_cycle, unarchive_cycle). The agent receives no context on prerequisites or expected outcomes.

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