run_sweep

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden, and it does not say whether running the sweep costs money, hits external services, has rate limits, or whether the generated file is destructive/overwrites an existing SWEEP_<date>.md. It states only the return format, which the schema already implies via the write flag.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. The action and the return value are both stated immediately.

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 has zero required params and no output schema, so a short description is defensible, but with no annotations the description should still cover the side effect of writing files and what a "sweep" covers. The core call is answerable; the surrounding context is not.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% and both parameters document their own defaults and formats. The description adds nothing beyond them, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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?

Specific verb ("run") plus a named artifact ("standing sweep report") and an explicit result ("return the markdown"). The domain term "standing sweep" is left undefined, so an agent that doesn't already know the product can't tell what the report actually contains, but the action itself is unambiguous.

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?

There is no guidance on when to call this versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no mention of the incremental behavior implied by the "since" default. Nothing says whether this should be run on-demand, on a schedule, or after data changes.

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