archive_custom_audiencePermanently archive a custom audience by ID to clean up unused audiences. Note that archived audiences cannot be restored, so use with caution.
Permanently archive a custom audience. Archived audiences cannot be restored.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| custom_audience_id | Yes | Audience ID |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly states the operation is permanent and that archived audiences cannot be restored, which is essential for a destructive action. It could add more context about downstream effects, but the core irreversibility is clearly communicated.
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 two short sentences with no wasted words. The core action is front-loaded, and the critical warning about permanence is included without elaboration.
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 single-parameter destructive operation with no output schema, the description covers the essential context: what happens and the permanent consequence. It does not mention required permissions or the response format, but those are less critical given the simple action and complete schema.
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 100%, and the only parameter, custom_audience_id, is documented as 'Audience ID'. The description does not add additional parameter-level meaning, but none is necessary for such a simple, well-covered schema.
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 uses a specific verb ('archive') and resource ('custom audience'), and clearly states the permanent nature of the action. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_custom_audiences, create_custom_audience, and mutate_audience_membership.
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?
The intended use case is implied by the verb 'archive' and the warning that archived audiences cannot be restored. However, there is no explicit guidance about when to choose this tool over alternatives, such as mutate_audience_membership or merge_custom_audiences.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.