archive_card

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It confirms the destructive nature by adding '(delete),' but lacks details on whether archiving is reversible, what side effects occur (e.g., notifications to board members), or if any authorizations are needed.

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 concise—one short sentence. It gets straight to the point without extraneous words. However, it could benefit from slightly more structure to improve readability, such as separating the action from the parenthetical clarification.

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 destructive operation with one parameter and no output schema, the description is insufficient. It does not explain return values (e.g., success/failure response), effects on related data (e.g., removing from board view), or any confirmation steps.

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 single parameter `cardId` is fully described in the schema ('The card ID to archive'), achieving 100% coverage. The description adds minimal extra value (only the parenthetical 'delete' context). Baseline of 3 is appropriate as the schema already handles the parameter meaning.

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 'Archive (delete) a card from a DragApp board,' clearly specifying the action (archive/delete) and the resource (card). It distinguishes this tool from other card-related siblings like `update_card` or `move_card` by explicitly noting that archiving equates to deletion.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., `move_card` to a different column instead). The description does not mention prerequisites, such as requiring edit permissions, nor does it advise against using it in certain contexts.

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