svn_cleanup

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states the tool is non-destructive ('without destructive cleanup flags'), but fails to describe what the tool actually does, such as removing locks or cleaning up unfinished operations, whether it modifies files, or requires network access.

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 at one sentence, but it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity. While it is structured and front-loaded, it could be slightly expanded to include more context without becoming verbose.

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 two parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description is insufficient. It does not explain return values, side effects, prerequisites (like being inside an SVN working copy), or how the tool interacts with the working copy. The context is incomplete for an agent to use it effectively.

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 50% description coverage (only 'cwd' is described). The description adds no information about parameters, so it does not compensate for the missing schema description of 'path'. An agent would not understand what 'path' signifies without relying on SVN knowledge.

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 states it runs 'svn cleanup' without destructive flags, which is clear but vague. It doesn't elaborate on what the svn cleanup command does (e.g., removing working copy locks), and while it hints at being non-destructive, it doesn't fully distinguish from sibling tools like svn_revert or svn_resolved.

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. Sibling tools like svn_revert, svn_update, and svn_resolved exist, but the description gives no context about appropriate scenarios (e.g., after an interrupted SVN operation) or when not to use it.

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