Restore an archived release pipeline in MCP Linear by specifying its pipeline ID, making it active for ongoing use.
Unarchive a release pipeline
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| pipelineId | Yes | The ID of the release pipeline to unarchive |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| success | No | ||
| releasePipeline | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.4.3Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description carries a lower burden. It states 'unarchive' but doesn't elaborate on behavior (e.g., restoring availability, permission needs). Adds marginal value beyond annotations.
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 with no wasted words. Every word contributes to purpose clarity.
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 large set of sibling tools and moderate complexity, the description is too minimal. It lacks context about what unarchiving entails, constraints, or output (though output schema exists).
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% and the schema already describes pipelineId. The description does not add new meaning beyond what is in the input schema.
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 'Unarchive a release pipeline' uses a specific verb (unarchive) and resource (release pipeline), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like archiveReleasePipeline and other unarchive tools (e.g., unarchiveRelease).
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, lacks prerequisites (e.g., pipeline must be archived), and does not contrast with similar unarchive operations.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.