qbittorrent_search_delete

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, so the destructive nature is known. The description adds the side effect 'free its results', which clarifies the broader impact beyond just deleting the job. No contradictions with annotations are present.

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, compact sentence that directly states the action and its effect. It contains no filler or redundant information, ideal for quick agent comprehension.

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 one-parameter destructive operation with an output schema present, the description sufficiently covers the primary action and a key side effect. It does not address error conditions or idempotency, but these are not critical for the tool's basic use.

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 0% description coverage for the single integer 'id'. The description does not explicitly state that 'id' identifies the search job, though the tool name and sentence context make it inferable. This is partial compensation but not fully explicit.

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 ('Delete') and identifies a clear resource ('a search job') with an explicit consequence ('free its results'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'stop' which likely halts but doesn't 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 description implies when to use the tool (when you want to delete a search job and free results), but it does not explicitly mention alternatives or when NOT to use it. It offers no direct comparison to related operations like 'search_stop' or 'search_results', so guidance is only implicit.

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