run_disk_cleanup

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

With no annotations, the description must convey safety and mutation semantics. It claims 'safely prunes' but doesn't disclose that data is permanently deleted, whether permissions are required, or the scope of the cleanup. The term 'safely' is vague and unsupported. For a deletes data, more transparency is expected.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It clearly states the action and purpose in a compact form, earning full marks for conciseness.

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 destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on the effect of each target, whether the operation is reversible, and what the return value indicates. The simplicity of the tool doesn't excuse the missing safety-related context.

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 descriptions cover 100% of the parameter ('targets' with enum values), so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal context by grouping targets into 'cache folders' and 'trash', but it doesn't explain specific enum values like 'derived_data' or 'package_caches'. No additional syntax or format details are provided beyond the schema.

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 uses specific verbs ('prunes', 'empties') and names the resources ('cache folders', 'trash'), clearly indicating a disk cleanup action. It is distinct from the read-only sibling tools like get_disk_usage, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate itself.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, when not to use it, or any exclusions. The presence of sibling tools like get_disk_usage and run_health_audit suggests related actions, but no comparison is provided.

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