recheck_torrent

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

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It states 'Force' implying it overrides current state, but fails to specify side effects (e.g., impact on seeding, speed during check, or whether data is unmodified). No warnings about potential data loss or required permissions.

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 very concise (one sentence, 8 words) with a clear action verb. However, it sacrifices necessary detail for brevity, making it minimally useful. It is properly front-loaded but incomplete.

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 parameter, no output schema), the description lacks essential context: expected outcomes, prerequisites, error conditions, or confirmation. The agent cannot reliably determine when invocation is appropriate or safe.

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 description coverage is 0%, placing full burden on the description to explain parameters. The description does not mention the 'hashes' parameter at all, leaving its meaning (torrent identifiers) and format (array of strings) entirely undocumented. This is a critical omission.

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 specific verb+resource ('Force a hash re-check of downloaded data'), which clearly indicates the tool's action and scope. It effectively distinguishes from sibling tools like add_torrent or list_torrents, though it could explicitly mention 'torrents' for even greater precision.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like stop_torrent or set_priority. The description does not mention prerequisites (e.g., torrent must be stopped) or typical scenarios (e.g., after corruption). The agent must infer usage from context alone.

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