cleanup_files

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

With no annotations, the description bears the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'clean up' without revealing whether cleanup is permanent, whether files are archived or deleted (though the schema mentions a type parameter), or any side effects or permission requirements. This is insufficient for a potentially destructive batch 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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the verb and resource. No redundant words or filler, maximizing information density.

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 destructive batch operation with no annotations and no output schema, the description omits critical context such as default behavior when parameters are omitted (though schema covers defaults), potential side effects, return values, and permission requirements. Given the tool's destructive nature and many siblings, the description is under-specified.

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%, so parameters are well-documented in the schema. The description adds minimal extra meaning beyond the schema, only reinforcing the workspace/connector scoping. It does not clarify parameter interactions or defaults beyond what the schema already states.

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 'Clean up log files for specified workspaces and connectors' clearly states the tool's function (clean up) and resource (log files), and specifies scope (workspaces/connectors). It distinguishes this from sibling tools like delete_file (single file), delete_log (single log), and list_files (listing).

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 explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is provided, nor are alternatives mentioned. The phrase 'for specified workspaces and connectors' implies batch cleanup, but there is no comparison to delete_file or delete_log, leaving the agent without clear decision-making guidance.

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