qui_search_torznab_cross_seed

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

With no annotations, the description carries full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It mentions POST (implying a possible mutation) but gives no details about side effects, permissions, rate limits, or response behavior. The output schema exists but is not referenced, leaving the agent blind to what this operation actually does.

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 single sentence is compact and to the point, but it spends its words on HTTP mechanics rather than meaningful information. It is concise without being substantive, though it does not waste 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?

This tool has a specific endpoint, path/query/body structure, and an output schema, yet the description provides no purpose, examples, parameter details, or usage guidance. It is severely under-specified relative to the tool's complexity.

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 offers no parameter definitions, so the description at least explains how to segment arguments into path, query, and body. However, it doesn't name any actual path variables, query keys, or required body fields, leaving the agent without concrete parameter semantics for this endpoint.

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 only references the endpoint path and HTTP method, which adds no functional understanding beyond the tool name. It fails to state what a cross-seed search is or what results it returns, and doesn't differentiate it from similar sibling tools like qui_search_torznab or qui_search_cross_seed_torrent.

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 choose this tool over alternatives. There is no context about prerequisites, typical scenarios, or how this search differs from other search-related tools. The description only explains argument placement, not usage context.

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