prune_store

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It transparently discloses that the operation is local-only and that it deletes based on age. It does not cover potential side effects like irreversibility or confirmation prompts, but the core behavior is well-explained.

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, consisting of two sentences. The first sentence states the action and default, the second clarifies scope and purpose. No extraneous information. Front-loaded with the action verb.

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 low complexity of the tool (one parameter, no output schema, no nested objects), the description is complete. It explains what it does, its scope, and its purpose, which is sufficient for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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 input schema covers the single parameter (days) with full description and default. The description repeats the default value (180) but adds no additional semantic meaning beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 3 is appropriate given 100% schema coverage.

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 action (delete), the resource (locally stored messages), and the condition (older than given days). It explicitly distinguishes from server-side deletion by noting that it only affects local history. This differentiates it from sibling tools like clear_local_store or delete_local_messages.

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 a clear use case ('keeping the store from growing unbounded') and specifies that it only affects local storage. However, it does not explicitly compare with alternatives such as clear_local_store or delete_local_messages, nor does it state when not to use this tool. The guidance is good but not exhaustive.

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