queue_move_bottom

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

Annotations already cover idempotency (idempotentHint=true) and non-destructiveness (destructiveHint=false), and the description does not contradict them. However, the description adds no behavioral detail beyond the operation itself—such as order preservation, behavior when torrents are already at the bottom, or side effects on other queued items. This is adequate given the annotation coverage, but not rich.

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 compact and front-loaded with the core action, followed by a focused parameter explanation. There is no redundant or filler text; every sentence contributes usable information.

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 single-parameter, non-destructive, idempotent queue operation with an output schema, the description is largely complete. The main gap is the lack of usage guidance relative to sibling queue-move tools, but the operational essentials are present.

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 schema only defines 'ids' as a loosely typed anyOf, with no property description. The description compensates by stating that ids are 'Torrent ids or hash strings', which meaningfully helps an agent construct valid input even though it does not elaborate on array-vs-scalar semantics.

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 action ('Move torrents') and the exact destination ('back of the queue'), which cleanly distinguishes this from sibling queue-moving tools (queue_move_top, queue_move_up, queue_move_down). The verb and resource are explicit and unambiguous.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus its queue-related siblings. While 'move to the back' implies a use case, the description does not explicitly state when to prefer queue_move_bottom over queue_move_top, queue_move_up, or queue_move_down, nor are any exclusions or alternative conditions provided.

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