file_clean_preview

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and discloses a critical behavioral trait: files are moved to .trash/ rather than deleted. It also implies no actual changes via 'dry-run'. However, it does not describe recursion, permissions, or the exact output format, though the output schema may cover return values.

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, front-loaded sentence that efficiently communicates the core purpose and safety behavior without redundancy or irrelevant details.

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 covers the dry-run and trash behavior but omits details about scan scope (e.g., recursive), pattern semantics, and what the 'impact' consists of. Since an output schema exists, return values are not required, but the description is minimal for a tool with no annotations and two unannotated 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?

The schema provides only parameter names (path, pattern) with no descriptions, and the tool description does not explain their formats or semantics. The only hint is 'matching files', suggesting pattern is a match criterion, but glob/regex syntax and the meaning of path remain unclear.

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 previews the impact of cleaning matching files, using the verb 'preview' and explicitly noting the dry-run behavior. It distinguishes itself from the sibling file_clean_apply by mentioning files are moved to .trash/ instead of deleted.

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 dry-run keyword provides clear context that this is a non-destructive preview, implying it should be used before applying cleanup. However, it does not explicitly mention the sibling file_clean_apply or state when not to use it, so it lacks explicit alternatives.

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