perform_auto_cleanup

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the key behaviors: deletes files based on age, supports dry-run, and preserves recent files. However, it does not mention whether deletions are permanent, require permissions, or are reversible, which would be important for a destructive cleanup 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?

Two concise sentences with no fluff. The core purpose is stated first, followed by key capabilities (dry-run and configurable retention). Every word earns its place.

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 that there is no output schema and no annotations, the description is moderate. It covers the essential behavior and options adequately for an agent to invoke the tool, but lacks safety guidance (e.g., recommend dry-run first, confirm permanent deletion). For a destructive operation, slightly more context would improve completeness.

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 100% of parameters with clear descriptions, so the schema already documents dry_run, max_age_hours, and preserve_recent. The description adds no new parameter-level detail beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 a specific action ('perform automatic cleanup') and target ('old output files'), with criteria ('age and retention policies'). It distinguishes itself from siblings like get_cleanup_suggestions (suggestions vs execution) and delete_execution_outputs (targeted deletion vs age-based cleanup), though it does not explicitly name those alternatives.

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 implies when to use it (when automatic cleanup based on age is desired) and mentions dry-run and preserving recent files, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or point to alternative sibling tools. Usage context is implied rather than explicitly specified.

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