Archive multiple documents simultaneously in Outline Wiki to organize your workspace by removing outdated or completed files in bulk.
Archive multiple documents at once.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| documentIds | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries full burden but provides minimal behavioral insight. It mentions 'archive' but doesn't clarify if this is reversible (see 'unarchive_document' sibling), requires permissions, has rate limits, or affects document accessibility. The agent must infer behavior from sibling names alone.
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, efficient sentence with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly.
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?
For a mutation tool with no annotations, no output schema, and 0% schema coverage, the description is inadequate. It lacks details on archival behavior, error handling, return values, and differentiation from siblings, leaving the agent with significant 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 description coverage is 0%, and the description adds no parameter details beyond the name 'documentIds'. It doesn't explain what document IDs are (e.g., format, source), constraints beyond schema minItems, or how the array is processed (e.g., order, error handling).
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 clearly states the action ('archive') and resource ('multiple documents'), distinguishing it from the single-document 'archive_document' sibling. However, it doesn't specify what 'archive' means operationally (e.g., moving to an archive state vs. permanent deletion).
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 like 'archive_document' (single) or 'batch_delete_documents'. The description implies bulk operation but lacks explicit context or prerequisites for batch processing.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.