tdarr_bulk_update_files

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

Absent annotations, the description does not disclose behavioral traits like whether the update is destructive, requires special permissions, or triggers side effects (e.g., reprocessing). 'Update' suggests mutation, but no further context is provided, leaving the agent unaware of risks.

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?

A single, well-structured sentence that is front-loaded with the key action and resource. No superfluous words or unnecessary details, making it efficient for an AI agent to parse quickly.

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?

Given the complexity (bulk operation, array parameter, nested object), the description is too minimal. With no output schema and no annotations, it fails to explain return behavior, error handling, idempotency, or async nature, leaving significant gaps for agent usage.

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 both parameters (fileIds, updatedObj), so a baseline of 3 applies. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema—it merely restates the parameter names and purpose implicitly through the tool's purpose.

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 'Bulk update specific files by their IDs' clearly states the verb (update), resource (files), and scope (bulk by IDs). It effectively distinguishes itself from sibling tools like tdarr_bulk_delete_files (deletion) and tdarr_scan_individual_file (scanning).

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when not to use it, or that tdarr_update_plugin_include might be preferred for plugins). The context is implied—bulk updates are for file IDs—but lacks exclusions or prerequisites.

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