qbittorrent_app_get_cookies

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

The description discloses the structure of each cookie entry (name/domain/path/value/expirationDate), adding useful context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. However, it doesn't elaborate on other behavioral aspects like whether all cookies are returned or any authentication requirements. No contradiction with annotations.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the resource and context. It provides the key detail about the structure without any fluff or 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?

For a simple getter with no parameters and an output schema present, the description is adequately complete. It explains what the cookies are and gives the field names. It could explicitly state that it retrieves the cookies, but the tool name covers that.

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?

There are no parameters, and the schema is empty. Per the baseline for 0 params, the description doesn't need to add parameter information. The structure of the return value is partially described, while the output schema presumably covers the full format.

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 identifies the resource (cookies) and context (.torrent downloads), but it lacks an explicit verb like 'get' or 'retrieve'. The tool name provides the action, and it is implicitly distinguished from sibling set_cookies, but the description itself doesn't state this.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool or alternatives. It doesn't mention that this complements qbittorrent_app_set_cookies or that it should be used to inspect current cookies. The usage is only implied by the tool name.

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