qui_start_cross_seed_search

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

With no annotations provided, the description must disclose behavior, but it only describes the mechanics of argument passing. It does not mention side effects, asynchronous execution, authorization requirements, or any state changes caused by the endpoint.

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 front-loads the endpoint and method, then quickly covers the parameter conventions. It is concise with no unnecessary words or repetition.

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?

The description lacks essential context: the actual purpose of the tool, expected input fields, behavior, and when to use it. While an output schema exists, it is not described, and the arbitrary 'arguments' schema leaves the agent with little understanding of what to pass. This is too incomplete for a complex endpoint.

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 description meaningfully explains how to structure the 'arguments' object: path variables at the top level, query values in 'arguments.params', and the request body in 'arguments.body'. This compensates for the completely undescriptive schema, though it omits specifics about actual path/query/body fields.

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 names the specific endpoint (POST /cross-seed/search/run) and HTTP method, making the operational target clear. However, it does not state the semantic purpose (e.g., starting a cross-seed search) nor differentiate it from other cross-seed search tools. The verb is 'call', which is generic.

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 given on when to use this tool versus related tools such as qui_run_cross_seed_automation or qui_apply_cross_seed_search. There are no prerequisites, alternative mentions, or situational context.

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