move_torrent

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the basic action. It doesn't disclose critical behavioral traits: whether this requires specific permissions, if it's destructive (e.g., overwrites existing data), rate limits, error conditions (e.g., invalid location), or what 'move' parameter does. The description adds minimal context beyond the tool name.

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 extremely concise with a single sentence that directly states the tool's purpose. It's front-loaded with no wasted words, making it easy to parse quickly. Every word earns its place by conveying the core action.

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 a mutation tool with 3 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no annotations, but an output schema exists, the description is minimally complete. It states the basic purpose but lacks details on behavior, parameters, and usage context. The output schema may cover return values, but the description doesn't address safety, prerequisites, or error handling adequately for a data-moving operation.

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 but adds no parameter information. It doesn't explain what 'torrent_id' refers to (e.g., hash, name), what 'location' format is (e.g., file path, directory), or the purpose of the 'move' boolean (e.g., copy vs. move, dry run). With 3 undocumented parameters, this is inadequate.

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 clearly states the action ('move') and resource ('torrent data'), specifying what the tool does. It distinguishes from siblings like 'remove_torrent' or 'delete_torrent' by focusing on relocation rather than deletion. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from tools like 'download_torrent' or 'set_torrent_labels' in terms of data manipulation scope.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites (e.g., torrent must be active or paused), exclusions (e.g., cannot move while downloading), or compare to siblings like 'remove_torrent' for deletion or 'download_torrent' for initial placement. Usage context is implied but not stated.

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