qbittorrent_rss_move_item

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, covering the mutation and non-destructive nature. The description adds the operation details but doesn't disclose potential side effects (e.g., whether renaming affects feeds or rules). With annotations present, a 3 is appropriate.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the verb, and contains zero wasted words. It clearly defines the action and parameters in an efficient manner.

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 move/rename operation with two string parameters, the description is largely complete. It could benefit from a note about path format (e.g., use forward slashes) but given the output schema exists and the operation is straightforward, it is adequate.

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?

Schema has 0% description coverage, and the description fully compensates by explaining item_path as the source and dest_path as the destination, using the 'from...to...' phrasing. This is critical for the agent to understand the parameter roles.

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 (move or rename), the resource (RSS folder/feed), and the source/destination parameters. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like add/remove/refresh by specifying the move/rename operation.

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 when to use this tool (to move or rename an RSS folder/feed) and provides clear context through the operation. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the purpose is specific enough that an agent would know when to select it.

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