cleanuparr_update_malware_blocker_config

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

The destructiveHint annotation already flags this as destructive, but the description adds little beyond that. It mentions 'per-arr blocklist settings' as part of the config but does not disclose that this is a full replacement (overwriting existing settings), potential validation requirements, or other behavioral implications. The phrase 'Replace' aligns with the annotation, so no contradiction, but the description offers minimal extra value.

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, concise sentence with no redundant words. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

Even though an output schema exists, the description fails to provide essential context for a destructive config update. It does not explain how to structure the config object, what the replacement entails, or any prerequisites. For an agent to invoke this correctly, more detail about the config schema and the effects of replacement would be necessary.

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 describes the single parameter 'config' only as an object with additionalProperties true, giving no property details. The description adds only a hint that it includes 'per-arr blocklist settings,' but does not explain the object structure, required fields, or valid values. With 0% schema description coverage, the description does not sufficiently compensate for the lack of parameter information.

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 clearly states the action ('Replace') and the target resource ('malware blocker config'), and adds a specific detail ('including per-arr blocklist settings') that distinguishes it from other config update tools. It is unambiguous and specific.

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 implies its usage (when you need to replace the malware blocker config) but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_malware_blocker_config or other update config tools. It does not mention prerequisites, side effects, or when not to use it.

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