qbittorrent_search_stop

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds minimal context (the action is 'stop' on a 'running' job). No details about side effects, idempotency, or failure behavior are given, but the annotation coverage is sufficient for a basic state-change operation.

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, front-loaded sentence of eight words. It conveys the action, resource, and parameter without any wasted words.

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 tool's simplicity (one required parameter, no nested objects, output schema present), the description is nearly complete. It lacks explicit error semantics or what happens to the job's results after stopping, but this is a minor gap for a straightforward stop 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 description adds 'by id' which clarifies the parameter is the search job's id, but the schema already defines an integer 'id'. With 0% schema description coverage, more detail would be helpful, but the single parameter is self-explanatory, so this is baseline-adequate.

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 specific action (stop) and resource (a running search job) with a unique identifier. It distinguishes from sibling tools like qbittorrent_search_start, qbittorrent_search_status, and qbittorrent_search_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 usage for active search jobs by saying 'running', but it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or alternatives like qbittorrent_search_delete for cleanup. No exclusions or pointers to sibling tools are provided.

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