notion_archive_page

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

Despite no annotations, the description discloses that the operation is a soft-delete and the page remains in trash for 30 days. This is valuable behavioral context beyond the basic operation.

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 compact: one sentence for the operation, one for restoration, and one for the parameter. It is front-loaded with the core purpose and contains no redundant text.

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?

The tool is simple with one required parameter, and the description covers purpose, soft-delete behavior, restore path, and parameter semantics. The presence of an output schema means return values don't need explanation. Slight gap: no mention of permissions or side effects, but not essential.

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 schema has 0% description coverage for page_id, but the description adds 'the page to archive,' providing clear meaning for the sole parameter. This compensates for the schema 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 clearly states the tool archives (soft-deletes) a Notion page, distinguishing it from delete_block or update_page. It also mentions restoration, further clarifying the specific operation.

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 description explicitly references notion_restore_page as the path for undoing the archival, giving context on when to use this tool vs. that alternative. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it (e.g., for permanent deletion).

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