prowlarr_bulk_update_indexers

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. While it mentions that the body applies fields 'to all of them,' it fails to disclose important behavioral traits such as mutation consequences, partial failure behavior, permissions required, or how the bulk operation interacts with existing settings. This is a significant gap for a mutating tool.

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 sentences long, front-loaded with the primary action, and contains no filler. Every word contributes useful information, making it highly efficient.

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 presence of an output schema, return values need not be described. However, the tool is a mutation with a loose body schema and no annotations, so the description could have provided more context on when to use it (vs single update), how applyTags behaves, or what error handling looks like. It covers the essentials but lacks depth for a bulk operation.

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 only a generic 'body' parameter with 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It does so by explaining that body is an IndexerBulkResource containing ids plus optional fields (tags/applyTags/enable/appProfileId) and that these apply to all target indexers. This adds meaningful semantics beyond the schema, though it does not detail field types or behaviors.

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 tool's function with a specific verb ('Bulk-edit') and resource ('indexers'), making its purpose unambiguous. It also distinguishes itself from sibling tools like 'prowlarr_update_indexer' (single update) and 'prowlarr_bulk_delete_indexers' (bulk delete).

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 term 'Bulk-edit' implies this tool is for updating multiple indexers at once, providing clear usage context. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions, such as 'use this instead of update_indexer for multiple indexers,' so it stops short of fully explicit guidance.

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