palinode_archive

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

The description says 'never hard-deletes' implying it is not destructive, but the annotations include destructiveHint: true, which indicates the tool may cause data loss. This is a contradiction. Although the description adds useful behavioral context (records reason, commits, keeps content auditable), the contradiction overrides and results in a score of 1.

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?

Four concise sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no fluff. Every sentence adds essential information.

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?

Covers key effects (archive, audit trail, supersedence, no hard-delete) and differentiates from re-saving. Lacks mention of error conditions (e.g., file not found) or prerequisites, but given the simple interface and rich annotations, it is mostly 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?

Schema coverage is 100%, adding meaningful context beyond raw schema: explains that superseded_by creates a SUPERSEDE rather than plain archive, and reason is recorded in history. This adds value beyond the parameter descriptions.

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 the tool archives a single obsolete memory, using specific verbs ('retire', 'sets status: archived'). It distinguishes from re-saving with a tombstone and from sibling palinode_archive_expired (batch archiving). The purpose is precise and unambiguous.

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?

Describes when to use (memory is wrong/obsolete) and provides a negative guideline ('instead of re-saving with a hand-written tombstone body'). Also explains when to use superseded_by for superseding vs plain archive. However, it does not explicitly compare to other sibling tools like palinode_delete or palinode_save, but the context is clear.

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