cleanuparr_update_download_client

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

The annotation destructiveHint=true already conveys destructiveness. The description adds only 'Use the secret placeholder for password,' which is a parameter-level tip rather than transparency about side effects, overwrites, auth requirements, or impact on existing client data. This is minimal additional behavioral disclosure.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the action ('Replace a download client'). Every word contributes meaning, with no redundancy, fluff, or repetition of schema/annotation data.

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 the nested client object and destructive hint, the description is under-specified. It does not explain how to identify the client via client_id, what fields the client object requires, or what the output schema returns. The password hint is useful but leaves major gaps for effective use.

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?

The schema has 0% description coverage for client_id and client. The description's password placeholder hint addresses a detail inside the client object but does not explain the meaning of client_id, the structure of the client object, or any required fields. This is insufficient for a tool with an unstructured object parameter.

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 states a clear action verb and resource: 'Replace a download client.' This distinguishes it from resource-specific siblings like update_arr_instance. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from create_download_client or delete_download_client, relying solely on the verb and resource name.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create_download_client or test_download_client. There is no mention of prerequisites, whether it updates an existing client, or any exclusions. The description leaves the agent without context for choosing this tool.

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