add_to_queue

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals that the tool modifies feeds.json, that this triggers qBittorrent searching, and that it fails on duplicates unless overwrite is set. It does not cover permissions or return value, but the core side effects and failure mode are transparent.

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?

Three compact sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose and followed by the two key behavioral details. No filler or redundant restatement of the schema.

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?

For a straightforward mutation with no output schema, the description covers the target, the side effect, parameter defaults, and the duplicate-failure condition. Minor gaps like the expected imdb_id format or behavior when a profile does not exist are not explicitly stated but are largely inferable.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds real meaning for indexer, describing its default resolution order, and for overwrite, describing its effect on duplicate ids. profile and imdb_id are largely self-explanatory from their names and the first sentence.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Add an IMDb id to a queue profile's feeds.json') plus the intended effect ('so qBittorrent starts searching for it'). This clearly distinguishes it from siblings like remove_from_queue and list_queue.

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 gives clear context for when to use it: when an IMDb id should be queued for searching. It also explains the overwrite behavior for already-queued ids. It does not explicitly name alternatives, but the operation and failure semantics make the intended usage clear.

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