Find movie torrents

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description adds valuable behavioral context: results are magnet links sorted by seeder count, and sign-in is required. No contradiction with annotations; the additional details exceed what structural fields convey.

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, no fluff. The first sentence front-loads the primary action and output, and the second covers the prerequisite and downstream call. Every word earns its place.

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 covers the main behavior, output format, sorting, sign-in requirement, and suggested next step. With no output schema, this is sufficient for a read-only search tool; minor gaps like default limit and error handling are covered by the schema or are not critical.

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 100% for all 5 parameters, so the description need not reiterate parameter details. It only mentions IMDb id, which is already documented in the schema. As no extra parameter semantics are added, baseline 3 is appropriate.

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?

Description states it searches torrent indexers for a movie by IMDb id and returns magnet links sorted by seeder count. This clearly identifies the tool's purpose and distinguishes it from sibling tools like shows_find_torrents and putio_add_transfer.

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 specifies a prerequisite (requires put.io sign-in) and a follow-up workflow (pass magnet to putio_add_transfer). While it doesn't explicitly contrast with alternative tools, the movie-focused IMDb-id search makes the intended use clear.

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