Archive / Unarchive Payment Link

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

The annotations (openWorldHint and idempotentHint) indicate side effects and idempotency, but the description adds no extra behavioral context. It merely restates the title without disclosing consequences such as the link becoming hidden or the operation's reversibility.

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 that directly and clearly conveys the tool's function. It is appropriately brief, with no wasted words, and the key action is front-loaded.

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 description is minimally adequate for a simple two-parameter toggle. The schema and annotations cover parameter details and idempotency, but the description lacks information about return values, error conditions, or the operational impact of archiving (e.g., whether the link disappears from lists), leaving some gaps in context.

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 input schema already provides complete descriptions for both parameters (100% coverage), so the description does not need to add parameter details. The phrase 'archive or unarchive' aligns with the archived boolean, but adds no meaning beyond what the schema already states.

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 explicitly states the action with a specific verb ('archive or unarchive') and a clear resource ('Payment Link'), making the tool's purpose immediately obvious. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like get_link and create_link, as no other sibling handles archiving.

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 when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it mention alternatives or prerequisites. Usage is only implied by the tool's name and the archived parameter, but the description itself offers no explicit context for choosing this tool over others.

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