qui_get_torznab_indexer_errors

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates a safe read operation, but the description adds no additional behavioral context such as rate limits, error handling, or response format. The argument structure guidance is more relevant to parameter semantics.

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?

Two sentences, direct and free of fluff. The information is dense but not overly verbose, though it could be more informative without adding length.

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 GET endpoint, the description covers the argument structure but omits the exact path variable name and any usage context. Output schema exists, so return values aren't needed, but invocation remains under-specified.

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% coverage (a generic 'arguments' object), so the description's guidance on path/query/body placement is valuable. However, it doesn't specify which path variables or query parameters exist, forcing the agent to infer from the endpoint URL.

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 tool calls the GET /torznab/indexers/{indexerID}/errors endpoint, which is a specific verb and resource. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like qui_get_torznab_indexer_health or qui_get_torznab_indexer_stats.

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 only argument-passing mechanics, not when to use this tool. It doesn't mention alternatives or when to prefer this over other indexer-related tools, leaving usage context unspecified.

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