Empty an entire recycle bin

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

Annotations already carry destructiveHint=true and openWorldHint=true, and the description adds substantial context beyond them: irreversibility, that this is the only operation that actually frees pool space, that personal and public bins are separate stores (with the total_num=0 failure mode), and that it purges everything in the bin rather than just the current task's deletions.

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?

Front-loads the destructive outcome in the first sentence, then organizes the remaining guidance into pitfalls and workflow. Every sentence carries operational value; nothing is redundant filler.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be detailed, yet the description still names the summary fields and tells the agent to verify total_num is non-zero before claiming space was freed. Combined with the pitfall and confirmation guidance, an agent has everything needed to invoke this safely.

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?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the personal/public and confirm semantics are already documented, giving a baseline of 3. The description goes further by explaining the operational consequence of choosing the wrong bin (success with total_num=0 and no space freed) and reinforcing that confirm must be explicitly true or the call is refused.

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?

Opens with a specific verb+resource+scope: 'Permanently purge an entire recycle bin.' It explicitly contrasts with the sibling that handles the narrower case ('Use zspace_recycle_purge to remove specific items instead'), so an agent can disambiguate without opening either 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 an explicit precondition workflow (call zspace_recycle_list first, show the user, get agreement), states the required confirm=true, and names the alternative tool and the condition that selects it. It also warns when the call will silently succeed but do nothing, which is genuine when-to-use guidance.

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