torrent_webapp

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral burden. It discloses the full user-facing flow, the QR code and Telegram fallback options, the exact prompt format, and the 5-minute code expiration. This gives the agent enough behavioral context to execute and to inform the user accurately.

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 longer than a simple one-liner, but every sentence carries necessary procedural information: URL delivery, pairing dialog options, user actions, code extraction, and expiration. It is front-loaded with the purpose and remains structured without redundancy.

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 completely covers the tool's role in the authorization flow, including fallback mechanisms and the subsequent authorize_webapp call. Since an output schema exists, return-value details are not required, and nothing essential for correctly invoking this tool is missing.

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 tool has zero parameters and the schema coverage is 100%, so there are no parameter semantics to explain. The baseline of 4 applies, and the description appropriately focuses on behavior rather than inputs.

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 states a specific verb-resource pair: present the Torrent Search webapp and its Telegram pairing access system, and it clarifies the deliverable (webapp URL and authorization instructions). It also distinguishes this from the sibling authorize_webapp by explicitly routing to it as the next step.

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 tool's role in the pairing flow is clearly implied: it is the initial presentation step, and the description says the next step is to call authorize_webapp with the extracted code and chat id. It does not explicitly list exclusions or alternatives, but the context makes when-to-use unambiguous.

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