Recycle bin retention policy

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint, but the description adds real behavioral context: -1 means never auto-purge, that is the factory default, and deleted data will occupy pool space indefinitely as a consequence. The 'Read-only' sentence is redundant with the annotation, and no auth or rate-limit context is offered, so it stops short of 5.

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 tool's purpose and returned fields are front-loaded in the first clause, followed by only the interpretations and the diagnostic cue that an agent actually needs. No filler sentences.

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 zero-parameter read with annotations and an output schema, everything required to call and interpret it is present. The -1 semantics are exactly the piece an output schema cannot convey, and they are supplied.

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?

Zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description's detail about the returned value -- days, with -1 meaning never auto-purge -- is interpretationally useful, though strictly it describes output rather than input, and an output schema is already present.

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?

States a precise verb+resource (read the recycle bin retention policy) and names the exact fields returned ({my_cycle, public_cycle} in days). This clearly separates it from the mutating siblings (zspace_recycle_purge/empty/restore) without the agent needing to open a schema.

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?

Gives a concrete diagnostic trigger: 'If a user reports that deleting files did not free space, check this first.' It also eliminates the alternative explicitly -- 'there is deliberately no MCP tool for changing it' -- so the agent knows not to hunt for a write counterpart.

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