qbittorrent_search_update_plugins

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

Annotations already convey that this is neither read-only nor destructive. The description adds minimal context about the update behavior (e.g., 'latest versions' implies network interaction), but does not elaborate on potential side effects or prerequisites. This is acceptable for a simple operation, but not rich beyond the annotations.

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 that is entirely on-topic, front-loaded with the verb, and contains no redundant information. Every word earns its place.

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 zero-parameter tool with a clear action, the description is fully self-contained. The output schema can handle return values, so no further context is required. The tool's simplicity means there is no missing information.

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 takes no parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies. The description correctly implies that no user input is needed, and there are no parameter details to provide.

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 ('update') and the resource ('all installed search plugins'), with a specific scope. It is easily distinguished from sibling tools like install, uninstall, and enable plugin.

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 tool's use case is clear from the description: to update all search plugins. While it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives, the sibling tool names make it obvious that install/uninstall/enable serve different purposes, so no exclusion is needed.

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