cleanup_old_import_sets

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

The description explicitly indicates a destructive action (deletion) and the condition for deletion. However, with no annotations, it lacks details on idempotency, error handling for invalid 'days_old' values, or any side effects. The description is adequate but minimal in disclosing behavioral traits.

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 two sentences, front-loaded with the action and condition, followed by a brief rationale. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or irrelevant information.

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 simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the action, condition, and rationale. It could mention safety (e.g., whether it's safe to run on production) or prerequisites, but it is largely complete for its complexity.

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 description adds meaning to the 'days_old' parameter by stating 'older than the given number of days', which the schema lacks (0% description coverage). It explains the parameter's purpose, though it could be more precise about constraints like positive integer or allowed range.

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 verb 'Deletes' and the resource 'completed sys_import_set_run records', along with the condition 'older than the given number of days'. This distinguishes it from siblings like 'cleanup_artifacts' and 'cleanup_migration' which target different resources.

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 a periodic maintenance use case with 'Run periodically to keep the instance healthy', but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'monitor_import_set_progress' or other cleanup tools. No exclusions or when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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