Open WebUI MCP Server

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden but only states 'Archive a chat' without explaining what archiving entails (e.g., is it reversible, does it hide or remove data, are permissions required?). This leaves critical behavioral traits undisclosed for a mutation 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 extremely concise at three words, front-loading the core action without unnecessary elaboration. Every word earns its place, making it efficient for quick scanning.

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?

For a mutation tool with no annotations and an output schema (which might help), the description is insufficient. It doesn't cover behavioral aspects like reversibility or effects, and while the output schema may provide return values, the description fails to add meaningful context beyond the bare minimum.

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 description adds no parameter information beyond the schema, which has 0% description coverage. However, with only 1 parameter (chat_id), the tool is simple enough that the description's lack of detail is less critical, warranting a baseline near 4 for minimal complexity.

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 chat' clearly states the action (archive) and resource (chat), making the purpose understandable. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling tools like 'delete_chat' or explain what 'archive' means operationally, leaving room for ambiguity.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'delete_chat' or 'clone_chat'. The description lacks context about prerequisites, consequences, or typical use cases, offering minimal help for decision-making.

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