notion_purge_shared_files

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses that only regular files are touched, subdirectories are left alone, and dry_run can list victims before deletion. This adds meaningful behavioral context beyond the raw schema, though it stops short of explicitly stating that the deletion is permanent and irreversible.

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 organized into three short paragraphs: the core action, the use case/alternative, and operational details. Every sentence adds value, and the most important information is front-loaded. No filler or redundancy.

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 that an output schema exists, the description covers purpose, usage, behavioral constraints, and parameters well. One minor ambiguity remains about whether the tool recurses into subdirectories (it says 'subdirectories are left alone' but not whether files inside them are candidates), but overall the description is sufficiently complete for correct invocation.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description fully explains both parameters: max_age_hours defines the age threshold for deletion, and dry_run switches to listing victims without deleting. This adds clear semantic meaning beyond the bare schema types and defaults.

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 opens with 'Delete files from the cross-MCP shared mount' — a specific verb and resource — and adds the age condition 'modification time is older than max_age_hours.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like notion_purge_file by targeting the shared mount and bulk age-based cleanup.

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 explicitly says 'Use this to clean up attachments handed over from the companion google-accounts-mcp server once they've been uploaded to Notion' and contrasts it with a host-level TTL sweep, noting the tool is for proactive cleanup at workflow end. It provides clear context and intent, though it does not name alternative tools or exclusions.

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