qui_get_torznab_indexer

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

The read-only nature is already declared by readOnlyHint, and the description adds the argument-passing convention (path variables, query in arguments.params, body in arguments.body) which is useful for invocation but not a behavioral trait. No additional side effects, error behavior, or permissions are disclosed beyond the annotation.

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 directly points to the endpoint and provides essential argument structure. No wasted words; it is front-loaded with the endpoint and then the argument-handling convention.

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 simple getter nature and the presence of an output schema, the description covers basic call mechanics but omits the business purpose and usage context. An agent might not know when to choose this over other getter tools or what to do with the result.

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 input schema is generic (any object) with 0% description coverage, so the description's instruction to place path variables, query values, and body in specific sub-keys adds necessary structure. However, it does not specify which query parameters or body fields apply to this endpoint, leaving the agent to infer from the URI alone.

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 identifies the specific endpoint GET /torznab/indexers/{indexerID}, making the operation clear from the URI. However, it does not explicitly state the semantic purpose (retrieve a specific Torznab indexer) and relies on the tool name to infer that, without differentiating from sibling tools like qui_get_torznab_indexer_health.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It lacks context such as 'use this to fetch details of a specific indexer' and does not mention any preconditions, exclusions, or linkage to other indexer-related tools.

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