linkding_list_archived_bookmarks

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is fully covered elsewhere. The description adds only the archived-only scope and the underlying REST path; it says nothing about pagination behavior (limit/offset), default sort order, or what a result set looks like.

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 short sentences with the archived scope front-loaded and no filler. The verbatim endpoint path is of marginal value to an agent but is compact and consistent with the rest of the server's descriptions.

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?

Nine optional parameters and no output schema mean the description should say a bit more about paging (limit/offset, default page size of 100) and result shape. The filter-parity pointer helps, but an agent must open the schema to learn the tool returns a limited page rather than all archived bookmarks.

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% with per-parameter descriptions, enum values and defaults for all nine filters, so the description need not restate them. The single sentence 'Filters match linkding_list_bookmarks' is a useful pointer but adds no syntax or format detail beyond the schema; baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('List archived bookmarks') and scopes it to the archived subset, which distinguishes it from linkding_list_bookmarks and linkding_list_shared_bookmarks. The explicit note that filters match linkding_list_bookmarks reinforces the distinction rather than repeating the name.

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?

Implicitly tells the agent to use this for archived items and that the filter semantics carry over from linkding_list_bookmarks, but never states when to prefer it over siblings like linkding_list_shared_bookmarks or how it relates to linkding_unarchive_bookmark. Usage is inferable rather than declared.

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