cleanup_garbage

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the default behavior (candidates listing without deletion) and the need for 'apply=True' to remove files. It also mentions the return format. However, it doesn't cover permissions, recovery options, or side effects of deletion.

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 5 sentences, front-loading the purpose and usage. Every sentence adds value without redundancy. The structure is clear and easy to parse.

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 8 parameters and no output schema (though context says 'has output schema: true', the description still lists return fields). However, the description fails to document several parameters, limiting completeness. For a cleanup tool, it provides adequate context for common use but lacks depth for advanced parameters.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It explains 'everything' and 'apply' briefly, but other parameters like 'keep_bundles', 'debug_older_than_days', and 'keep_artifacts' are left unexplained. The description adds some value but does not fully compensate for the missing schema descriptions.

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's purpose: 'Garbage-collect accumulated research-hub files (v0.46+)'. The verb 'garbage-collect' and resource 'research-hub files' are specific, and the version constraint adds precision. Among siblings like 'tidy_vault', it is distinct in targeting research-hub files.

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 explicit triggers: 'Use when: user says "clean up", "free disk space", or "GC the vault".' It also explains the default dry-run mode and the need for 'apply=True' to delete. However, it does not mention when not to use this tool or contrast it with similar siblings.

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