qbittorrent_app_shutdown

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

Annotations already indicate destructive behavior, but the description adds critical context: it stops the entire daemon/WebUI and cannot be undone from this tool. This goes beyond the structured hints, making the operational impact and irreversibility explicit, which is especially valuable for a destructive action.

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: the first clearly states the action and scope, the second adds a crucial warning and irreversibility note. Every word earns its place, and the key details are front-loaded.

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?

For a simple no-parameter destructive action, the description is complete. It covers what is shut down, the breadth (daemon/WebUI), and the consequence (cannot be undone), which complements the annotations and output schema. No additional information is needed for an agent to decide when and how to invoke it.

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 tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The description correctly omits parameter details, and the baseline for 0-parameter tools is 4, as no further clarification is needed.

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 uses a specific verb ('Shut down') and a clear resource ('qBittorrent application'), further clarifying it stops the whole daemon/WebUI. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by emphasizing the full application scope versus operations on individual torrents or the session (e.g., logout).

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 provides some usage guidance ('use sparingly, it cannot be undone from here') but does not explicitly compare to alternatives or state when not to use it. The warning implies caution, but there is no clear 'when to use vs. alternatives' guidance, such as contrasting with logout or torrent-specific actions.

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