xcodebuild_archive

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavioral traits, but it only lists arguments and a vague 'Returns Archive result.' No details about side effects, required input combinations, or error conditions are given. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the schema itself.

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, with only four lines for arguments and one for returns. It uses clear headings (Args, Returns) and front-loads the purpose. Every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 that an output schema exists and no annotations are present, the description provides a basic understanding of inputs and purpose but lacks behavioral details, such as handling of concurrent project and workspace inputs, error messages, or archive path format. It is adequate for a simple archive tool but not fully complete.

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 adds meaning by explaining each parameter: 'Path to .xcodeproj file' for project, 'Path to .xcworkspace file' for workspace, 'Scheme name to archive (required)' for scheme, and 'Path where to save the archive' for archive_path. It clarifies that scheme is required despite the schema not marking it as required, which is helpful.

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 clearly states 'Archive an Xcode project or workspace,' which is a specific verb-resource pair. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like xcodebuild_build (build) and xcodebuild_test (test), all of which have distinct actions.

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. It does not specify prerequisites, such as requiring a project or workspace, nor does it mention scenarios where archive is preferred over build or test. The sibling tools are listed but not differentiated.

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