client_archive

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

Annotations indicate destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description adds critical behavioral details: it's reversible, requires owner and confirm, cannot archive the active client, and leaves credentials untouched. No contradiction with annotations.

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?

Three concise sentences, each providing essential information without redundancy. The main action is front-loaded, and every sentence adds value (reversibility, constraints, exclusions). No wasted words.

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?

The description covers the main action, constraints, preconditions (owner, confirm), edge case (refuses to archive active client), and non-effects (credentials). No output schema is needed as the tool is a toggle with clear state change. The description is sufficient 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?

Schema description coverage is 75% (actor, confirm, clientId have descriptions; id lacks description but is obvious as target). The description reiterates the role of actor and confirm but does not add new parameter-level details beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is appropriate as schema does most of the work.

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?

Description explicitly states 'Toggle a client between active and archived (reversible)', which clearly identifies the verb (toggle) and resource (client status). It distinguishes from sibling tools like client_set_active by indicating it toggles, and explicitly says it's reversible.

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?

Provides explicit guidance: requires actor:'owner' and confirm:true, refuses to archive the currently active client (advises to switch first), and clarifies it never touches credentials. This gives clear when-to-use and when-not-to-use conditions.

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