Yes, thank you for asking a clarifying, good-faith question in order to learn. In fact, the habitat part isn't even required!
A dyson swarm is just a bunch of satellites, each harnessing energy from a the same star (what they do with that energy is up to them). 1 satellite is the singular form of satellites. No need to alert NASA, they already know :)
The good news is that it seems you might be just now learning that humans have the beginnings of a dyson swarm already in the works. What a great day for you!
Oh what a bad faith response trying to have some moral high ground. The Dyson swarm as defined are satellites close the the Sun collecting energy, where it is dense and relaying it further nothing else. Trying to compose there something else is moving goal post and then is not a Dyson swarm.
With this goal post moving we can start claiming that Oort cloud is a Dyson swarm. Or are all stars in this galaxy a Dyson swarm moving around central black hole? Maybe if we will move goal posts further they will!
With the ISS being "close to the sun" in my opinion (close enough to capture energy), and with the "relaying it further" not actually required for the term (all the energy can be used locally, and it still applies), it seems that the ISS does meet the definition.
Also, while I assumed good faith in my above reply, you've dashed my hopes: please don't ask bad-faith questions here. This is the wrong forum for that. You've shown yourself capable of announcing that you personally disagree with something. I think politely doing that is better than asking bad faith questions, pretending to want to learn, while intending to argue with the answer.
