linear_archiveRelease

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

The description 'Archive a release' does not disclose behavioral traits. With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It fails to explain what archiving entails (e.g., does it hide the release, change its status, or delete it?), whether it is reversible (though sibling 'linear_unarchiveRelease' implies reversibility), or any necessary permissions or side effects.

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 sentence 'Archive a release', which is extremely concise. However, it is too minimal; it lacks structure or additional details that could be provided without becoming verbose. For a simple tool, conciseness is good, but it sacrifices informativeness.

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?

Given the low complexity (1 parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description is incomplete. It does not explain the effects of archiving, the return value, or any contextual details that would help an agent understand the full impact of the operation. A more complete description could include one or two sentences about behavior.

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 single parameter 'releaseId' is fully described in the input schema with the note 'The ID of the release to archive'. Since schema description coverage is 100%, the description adds no extra meaning. According to guidelines, baseline is 3 when schema handles the burden.

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 'Archive a release' clearly states the verb (archive) and the resource (release), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools that also perform archive operations on other entities, such as 'linear_archiveProject' or 'linear_archiveInitiative'. The name helps, but the description adds no distinguishing context.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., permissions, release state) or when not to use it. Sibling tools like 'linear_completeRelease' and 'linear_archiveReleasePipeline' could be confused, but no differentiation is given.

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