easysociable-mcp

Archive brand

archive_brand

Idempotent

Archive an active brand to soft-hide it from default pickers and list queries while keeping styling tokens. Use for decluttering, not deletion; restore later if needed.

Instructions

Archive an active Brand to soft-hide it from default pickers and list queries without losing styling tokens. Call to declutter workspace brands. Do NOT use for permanent deletion; use delete_brand instead. Idempotent state transition, fully reversible via restore_brand. Existing slideshow runs referencing this brand continue to display correctly. Returns updated Brand with status set to archived.

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`brandId`	Yes	The unique identifier of the brand to archive.

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`status`	No	Updated status (archived).
`brandId`	No	Brand ID.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.17Oct 5, 2026

changedOutput schema / (root)

Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+  "properties": {
+    "brandId": {
+      "description": "Brand ID.",
+      "type": "string"
+    },
+    "status": {
+      "description": "Updated status (archived).",
+      "type": "string"
+    }
+  },
+  "type": "object"
+}

Changed1 schema field changedv0.1.16Oct 5, 2026
- addedInput schema / properties / brandId / description
```
Added value: +"The unique identifier of the brand to archive."
```
First observedv0.1.13Oct 5, 2026

TDQS

A4.7/5.0

Behavior5/5

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

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, but the description adds substantive context beyond them: it is a reversible state transition via restore_brand, styling tokens are preserved, and existing slideshow runs referencing the brand keep working. Those side-effect disclosures are exactly what an agent cannot infer from annotations alone.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loads the core action and its scope, then layers the exclusion, reversibility, side effects, and return value in tight, non-redundant sentences. Every sentence carries distinct information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so the return value need not be elaborated, and the description nonetheless notes the returned Brand's archived status. With usage alternatives, side effects, and reversibility all covered, the definition is complete for a single-parameter state-transition tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

There is one parameter with 100% schema description coverage, so the schema fully documents brandId. The description adds no format or syntax detail beyond it, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb+resource ('Archive an active Brand') and immediately scopes the effect ('soft-hide it from default pickers and list queries without losing styling tokens'). This is clearly distinguishable from sibling delete_brand and restore_brand without opening any schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explicitly states when to use it ('Call to declutter workspace brands') and when not to, naming the alternative ('Do NOT use for permanent deletion; use delete_brand instead'). Nothing about tool selection is left to inference.

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