cleanup_old_transcripts

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states that transcripts older than a given number of days are deleted, but does not mention permanence, undoability, effects on directories, or permission requirements. This is minimal for a delete 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 extremely concise, consisting of two short sentences that convey the core purpose and a hint of benefit. No wasted words.

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 deletion tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description lacks important details such as whether deletions are permanent, what the default behavior is for output_dir, and how it interacts with sibling tools. While schema covers parameters, overall context for safe usage is insufficient.

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 has 100% description coverage, so the description adds no new parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides. The description's mention of 'days' does not enhance understanding of the parameter's format or behavior beyond the schema's example.

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 deletes transcripts older than a specified number of days, with a clear verb and resource. It implicitly distinguishes from sibling tools like delete_all_transcripts and delete_transcript by focusing on age-based deletion, but does not explicitly differentiate.

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?

There is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives like delete_all_transcripts or delete_transcript. The phrase 'helps manage disk space' provides some context, but without exclusion criteria or usage conditions, the agent has no decision framework.

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