set_downloader_cookie

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It indicates that the cookie is used for authenticated downloads, but does not disclose whether the cookie is persisted, whether it overrides existing cookies, or any security implications. This is a mutation tool and the lack of side-effect details prevents a higher score.

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 a single, compact sentence that delivers the essential information immediately: what is set, for which platform type, and why. There is no redundancy or irrelevant detail.

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?

This is a simple tool with two required parameters and an output schema exists. The description explains the goal and the general purpose adequately for an agent to understand its function in the broader download workflow. It does not need to elaborate on return values or complex behavior, making it sufficiently complete for the tool's complexity.

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. It mentions 'platform' indirectly through the example 'bilibili' and 'cookie' through 'SESSDATA', which adds some meaning beyond the schema's bare titles. However, it does not formally define both parameters or enumerate allowed platform values, leaving room for ambiguity.

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 tool's action ('设置' - set), the resource ('平台下载 Cookie' - platform download cookie), and the purpose ('用于下载需登录/会员的内容' - to download content requiring login/membership). This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from sibling tools like set_transcriber or add_provider.

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 implies when to use this tool: when downloading content that requires login or membership authentication. It provides a concrete use case example (bilibili's SESSDATA). However, it does not explicitly state alternatives or when not to use, so it falls short of a 5.

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