smartgym_archive_routines

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, so the description doesn't need to re-warn. It adds genuinely new behavior: the operation is reversible via smartgym_unarchive_routine, and the default dry_run=true performs no mutation at all. Minor gap: it doesn't say what 'archived' means to downstream reads.

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 lines, front-loaded with the action and scope, followed by the reversal path and the dry-run default. No filler.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need no explanation, and the key behaviors (scope, reversibility, safe default) are covered. Slight incompleteness around what archiving does to the routine's visibility and how partial failures are handled.

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 0%, so the description must carry the load. It clarifies that routines may be passed as names or ids (schema only says array of strings) and explains the dry_run semantics and default. It doesn't cover edge cases like duplicate or unknown identifiers.

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 (Archive) and resource (routines), clarifies accepted identifier forms (names or ids), and scopes the effect to 'every device'. It also names the sibling tool that reverses it, so an agent can distinguish it from unarchive_routine and the other routine tools.

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?

Gives clear context: archiving is reversible via smartgym_unarchive_routine, and dry_run=true is the default and sends nothing, which tells the agent the safe path. It stops short of explicitly stating when to prefer this over siblings like update_routine or apply_routine.

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