remove_torrent

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

The annotations already establish destructiveHint, and the description adds concrete behavioral context: delete_local_data erases files from disk, cannot be undone, and ids never default to all torrents. This clarifies the conditional destructiveness rather than merely restating the annotation.

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 two focused parameter notes. Every line carries necessary information with no filler.

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 two-parameter destructive tool with an output schema and annotations, the description covers the essential behavior, parameter semantics, and irreversible file-deletion risk. It does not spell out side effects on seeding state, but that is minor given the combination of schema, annotations, and sibling context.

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%, and the description fully compensates by documenting both parameters: ids accepts torrent ids or hash strings and is required, while delete_local_data controls file deletion and is irreversible. This is meaningful semantic content well beyond the raw schema.

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 opening line uses a specific verb and resource ('Remove torrents') and immediately qualifies the optional destructive scope ('optionally deleting their downloaded files'). This clearly differentiates the tool from siblings like start_torrents/stop_torrents and move_torrent_data.

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?

Usage is only implied by the action ('Remove torrents...'); the description does not explicitly say when to use remove_torrent instead of stop_torrents or other alternatives. It does provide a pertinent safety usage note ('Required -- this tool never defaults to every torrent'), but no when-not or alternative routing.

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