Server Quality Checklist

Tool Scores

• search_c411B
  3.1/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It states nothing about network requirements, rate limits, authentication, idempotency, or whether results are cached. The minimal description offers no behavioral context beyond the basic action.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  The single sentence 'Search for torrents on c411.org' is appropriately sized with zero redundancy. It is front-loaded with the action and contains no filler text, making it efficiently scannable.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness3/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Given the 100% parameter schema coverage and presence of an output schema, the description does not need to elaborate on return values or parameter details. However, it lacks mention of the typical workflow (search → download/info) that would complete the context for an agent selecting among the four related tools.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  With 100% schema description coverage, the input schema fully documents all 5 parameters (query, sortBy, sortOrder, page, perPage). The description adds no additional semantic information beyond what the schema provides, which warrants the baseline score for high-coverage schemas.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose4/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description states a specific verb ('Search') and resource ('torrents on c411.org'), clearly identifying the tool's function. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like 'get_c411_torrent_info' (which retrieves specific torrent details by ID rather than searching).

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines2/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It fails to mention that search results are typically prerequisite for using sibling tools like 'download_c411_torrent' or 'get_c411_torrent_info', or that this is the entry point for discovery.

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

• get_c411_torrent_infoA
  3.6/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  With no annotations provided, the description carries full disclosure burden but only states it's a read operation ('Get') targeting metadata. It fails to disclose what 'detailed metadata' specifically includes, error conditions for invalid hashes, rate limits, or caching behavior.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Single sentence of 10 words with zero waste. Front-loaded with action verb 'Get', immediately identifies the resource (c411.org torrent metadata), and specifies the lookup key (infoHash). Every word earns its place.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Appropriate for a simple 1-parameter tool with output schema present (no need to describe return values). Sufficient for invocation but could be improved by explicitly mentioning the sibling workflow (obtain hash via search_c411 first).

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 100% with the infoHash parameter fully documented including pattern validation. The description mentions 'by its infoHash' but adds no semantic meaning beyond the schema's existing '40-character hex infoHash' description, meeting the baseline for high-coverage schemas.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  The description uses specific verb 'Get' with clear resource 'detailed metadata for a c411.org torrent' and scope identifier 'by its infoHash'. This clearly distinguishes from sibling download_c411_torrent (content vs metadata), get_c411_torrent_comments (metadata vs comments), and search_c411 (specific hash lookup vs broad search).

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  The phrase 'by its infoHash' implicitly signals you must already possess the hash to use this tool, distinguishing it from search_c411. However, it lacks explicit guidance on the prerequisite workflow (search first, then this tool) or when to prefer alternatives.

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

• get_c411_torrent_commentsA
  3.8/5.0
  Behavior2/5

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

  No annotations provided, yet description fails to disclose behavioral traits: no mention of pagination behavior (despite page/limit params), rate limits, authentication requirements for c411.org, or handling of empty comment sets. 'Get' implies read-only but does not confirm it.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Single efficient sentence of 9 words. Front-loaded with verb, zero redundancy, every token carries meaning (domain, resource, identifier).

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Adequate for a read operation given 100% schema coverage and existence of output schema (which handles return value documentation). Could be improved by mentioning pagination or empty state handling, but functional for tool selection.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters3/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 100%, establishing baseline 3. Description adds minimal semantics beyond schema—only linking infoHash to the retrieval operation via 'by its infoHash'. Schema already documents the 40-character hex pattern and pagination defaults.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  Specific verb 'Get' + resource 'comments for a c411.org torrent' clearly identifies the operation. Explicitly distinguishes from siblings: targets comments (not download, info metadata, or search index) and specifies the external domain.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines4/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  Provides clear context by identifying the specific resource (comments) and required identifier (infoHash), implicitly distinguishing from sibling torrent operations. However, lacks explicit workflow guidance (e.g., 'use after search_c411 to retrieve infoHash').

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

• download_c411_torrentA
  4/5.0
  Behavior3/5

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

  No annotations provided, so description carries full disclosure burden. Successfully discloses the side effect ('save to disk'), indicating filesystem mutation. However, lacks details on idempotency, network requirements, error handling (e.g., invalid hash), or output structure despite having an output schema available.

  Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

  Conciseness5/5

  Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

  Single, dense sentence with zero waste. Front-loaded with the action verb, immediately communicating purpose. Every clause earns its place: source domain, identification method, and persistence mechanism are all efficiently packed.

  Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

  Completeness4/5

  Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

  Appropriate for a 2-parameter tool with full schema coverage and existing output schema. Covers the essential 'what' and 'where to' aspects. Minor gap: could briefly mention the return value indicates success/failure or file path since annotations are absent.

  Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

  Parameters4/5

  Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

  Schema coverage is 100%, establishing a baseline of 3. Description adds value by clarifying the infoHash's role in identifying the specific torrent to retrieve ('by its infoHash'), and implicitly connects the outputDir to the 'save to disk' action. Could mention the default /tmp behavior explicitly, but overall adds meaningful usage context.

  Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

  Purpose5/5

  Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

  Excellent specificity: states the verb ('Download'), resource ('.torrent file'), source ('c411.org'), identifier ('by its infoHash'), and side effect ('save to disk'). Clearly distinguishes from siblings 'get_c411_torrent_info' and 'search_c411' through the explicit action of downloading vs retrieving metadata or searching.

  Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

  Usage Guidelines3/5

  Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

  Provides implied usage context through the specific action ('download... save to disk'), but lacks explicit when-to-use guidance contrasting with siblings. Does not state prerequisites (e.g., valid c411.org infoHash) or error conditions.

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