archive_dialog

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

Annotations already declare a non-read-only, non-destructive, non-idempotent operation. The description adds the folder=1 detail but does not explain the effect on dialog visibility, recoverability, or any side effects. It does not contradict annotations, but adds only marginal context.

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 a single, short sentence with no redundant wording. The action is front-loaded and the folder detail is compactly included. Every word earns its place.

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?

Despite the presence of an output schema and annotations, the description is too sparse. It fails to explain the 'chat' parameter, prerequisites, or what happens after archiving. For an AI agent to invoke it correctly, additional external knowledge about the parameter and expected behavior is required.

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 required 'chat' parameter is documented only in the schema as integer or string, with no description. The tool description does not explain how 'chat' identifies the dialog or what formats are accepted. With 0% schema description coverage, this is a significant gap.

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 'Переместить' (move) and resource 'диалог' (dialog), clearly indicating the action of archiving. The folder=1 detail further specifies the target archive. It distinguishes from siblings like 'unarchive_dialog' by the opposite action.

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 the plural 'archive_dialogs' or the reverse 'unarchive_dialog'. The description offers no context about single vs. batch operations or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage from the name alone.

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