Much would depend on which Gowron found more important: restoration of Klingon fighting trim after long dormancy, combined with purging of disloyal elements - or an actual victory in taking DS9, another move guaranteed to boost his reputation as a great military leader. I could well see him choosing the former over the latter. After all, he had little intent of taking (or even taking on) DS9 before the fake Martok goaded him into it.
On the other hand, organizing of these punitive suicide squads would probably be something he'd need to plan in advance, and if he had no intent of boarding and conquering DS9... I mean, his declared goal of ousting Founders from Cardassia would be best served by destroying DS9, and he could have achieved that more easily than boarding and possessing. The initial steps would be the same: suppress defenses, collapse shields. But if step three were "blast to pieces" rather than "take over Ops", the fight would have been over much sooner!
Apart from punitive squads, would there be any rhyme or reason to the use of boarding parties with swords drawn? Mind you, most of the Klingons did not have their swords drawn: the ones on the Promenade had them slung over the left shoulder (if carried at all) while the right one was holding a disruptor. And of the first wave to beam into Ops, only one opted for a drawn sword. So the question becomes, why did the Klingons decide to draw their swords? Can't be they were afraid of hurting the equipment, as they saw Starfleet and the Bajorans shoot around with abandon.
Parties thus armed might still be punitive; if Gowron really wanted the station taken with efficiency, he'd beam in flash-bangs first, or theragen gas, or disruptor drones. Giving the condemned a disruptor would not be a problem, if you only gave it to him at the transporter room where you did have bombs, theragen or drones in the ready to execute any mutineers or cowards.
Timo Saloniemi