prune_storage_backups

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

The description notes that dry_run defaults to True for safety, indicating a safety feature. However, it does not disclose that the operation permanently deletes backups, potential authentication needs, or other side effects. Since no annotations exist, this is a moderate disclosure.

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 concise with a header line and a bullet-like list of arguments. It is front-loaded with the main purpose, and every sentence adds value without redundancy.

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 tool has 6 parameters, a destructive action, and an output schema, the description covers the purpose, all parameters, and includes a safety note. It does not detail return values, but the output schema exists. It is fairly complete for a backup pruning tool.

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?

With 0% schema coverage, the description adds explanations for each parameter, including an example for prune_backups and the safety default for dry_run. This compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions, though pattern details for prune_backups are missing.

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 prunes (deletes) old backups from storage according to a retention policy. It uses a specific verb and resource, distinguishing it from sibling tools like delete_storage_volume or delete_backup_job.

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 implies usage for enforcing retention policies on backups but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives among sibling tools (e.g., manual deletion via delete_storage_volume).

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