archive_deal_pipeline

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

With no annotations, the description should explain the consequences of archiving, but it only repeats the verb. It does not disclose reversibility, state change, side effects, or any behavioral details, leaving the agent without essential information.

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 very short and front-loaded, with no wasted words. However, it is under-specified; the conciseness comes at the cost of essential information, making it not appropriately sized for the tool's needs.

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, the description is inadequate. It does not explain what archiving does, how it affects the pipeline, or when to use it. The output schema may provide return type, but the side effects are unclear.

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 description labels pipeline_id as 'The Nimble pipeline ID', which adds minimal context (system name) but no format, constraints, or source. Given 0% schema coverage, it only partially compensates for the bare schema field.

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 deal pipeline' directly restates the tool name without adding specificity, such as what archiving entails or how it differs from deleting or unarchiving. It is a tautology that provides no additional clarity.

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 about when to choose this tool over alternatives like delete_deal_pipeline or unarchive_deal_pipeline. The description gives no context for tool selection.

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