archive_query

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

The term 'soft-delete' discloses that the operation is reversible rather than a permanent deletion, adding context beyond the bare action. However, it does not explain how soft-delete manifests in Redash (e.g., visibility, restoration), permission requirements, or effects on dependent objects.

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, front-loaded sentence that communicates the essential action efficiently with no wasted words.

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 is simple with one parameter, making the description adequate. However, it omits any mention of return values or error behavior, and since no output schema exists, a brief note on success/failure would improve completeness.

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 fully describes queryId, and the description adds no additional parameter semantics. Baseline of 3 applies because schema coverage is 100%.

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 the specific verb 'archive' with the resource 'query', and clarifies it's a soft-delete operation. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like update_query, get_query, and list_queries.

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 given about when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description doesn't mention prerequisites, the consequences of archiving, or when a soft-delete is preferred over other operations.

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