qbittorrent_log_peers

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already signals a safe read operation. The description adds behavioral context by specifying the JSON array format with fields and explaining the incremental fetch behavior of last_known_id. This goes beyond the annotation without contradicting it.

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 only two sentences. The first sentence defines the tool's purpose and output shape, and the second explains the parameter. Both sentences earn their place with no fluff or redundancy.

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?

The tool is simple (one optional parameter), and the output schema exists, so the description need not detail return values. It covers the response structure (JSON array with fields) and parameter behavior, making it complete for an agent to select and invoke correctly.

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 zero description coverage (0%) for the only parameter, so the description carries the full burden. It fully explains last_known_id's purpose and effect, which is essential for correct invocation. This is exactly what the parameter semantics dimension requires.

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 explicitly states 'Peer-block log entries as a JSON array of {id, ip, timestamp, blocked, reason}', clearly identifying the resource (peer-block log) and the action (retrieval). It distinguishes this from sibling tools like qbittorrent_log_main (general log) and qbittorrent_sync_torrent_peers (live peers) by focusing specifically on peer-block log entries.

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 clear context for when to use the tool: when peer-block log entries are needed. It also gives concrete usage guidance for the parameter with 'Pass last_known_id to fetch only entries newer than a given id.' However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, so it falls short of a 5.

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