Archive a task

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says the task is moved; it does not state whether the operation is reversible, whether it is a soft-delete, what side effects occur, or what the call returns. For a mutating tool this is a significant 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?

A single sentence contains the entire meaningful description; there is no filler, repetition, or unnecessary detail.

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 one-parameter mutation tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is minimal but leaves important context (reversibility, distinction from delete/restore, expected response) unstated. It is barely viable for correct invocation.

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 schema has 0% description coverage and the description does not explain the id parameter beyond 'a task' implicitly tying it to the resource. Since the description was expected to compensate for the bare schema and does not, parameter semantics are under-specified.

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 states a clear action ('Moves a task') and destination ('the archive'), so an agent can tell it archives rather than deletes or restores. It does not explicitly differentiate from sp_task_delete or sp_task_restore, but 'archive' is a distinct semantic target.

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 choose archive over the sibling delete/restore tools. With sp_task_delete and sp_task_restore in the same group, the agent is left to infer all selection criteria.

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