Queue an exact Soulseek result in slskd when the user confirms they own or have permission to download the file.
Queue one exact Soulseek result in slskd. Requires explicit confirmation that the user is authorized to download it.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| size | Yes | ||
| filename | Yes | ||
| username | Yes | ||
| rights_confirmed | Yes | True only after the user confirms they own or have permission to obtain this file. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden, but it mostly restates the rights_confirmed parameter requirement already present in the schema. It does not disclose side effects, what happens after queuing, failure conditions, or output behavior, so it adds little beyond the structured data.
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 front-loaded sentence with no filler, making it easy to scan. It loses a point because part of the second clause duplicates the rights_confirmed parameter description.
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 is a mutating queue/download operation with no annotations, no output schema, and four required parameters, yet the description gives almost no operational context such as what happens after queuing or how to verify the exact result. An agent would need to infer too much to invoke it correctly.
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 phrase 'one exact Soulseek result' hints that username, filename, and size form an exact identifier, but only 25% of parameters have schema descriptions and the tool description does not explain size units, filename expectations, or how these fields uniquely identify a result. It does not compensate for the low schema coverage.
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 a specific action ('Queue'), a specific resource ('one exact Soulseek result'), and the system ('slskd'), so an agent immediately knows what the tool does. The action is clearly distinct from the sibling tools 'search_music' and 'list_downloads' without needing their schemas.
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 wording implies this tool should be used when a specific Soulseek result has already been found and is ready to queue, but it never explicitly states when to use it versus the siblings or what conditions would make it inappropriate. The authorization requirement is a prerequisite, not guidance on choosing this tool among alternatives.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.