qbittorrent_app_set_cookies

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

Annotations already mark this as a mutation (readOnlyHint=false), and the description adds that it replaces cookies for torrent downloads, which gives operational scope. It does not detail all side effects, but the simple nature of the operation and existing annotations make this adequate.

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?

Two concise sentences: the first states the action and purpose, the second defines the parameter format. No redundant information, and the most important information is front-loaded.

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 the tool has one parameter and an output schema, the description covers the purpose, scope, and parameter structure adequately. It lacks only minor details like whether replacement is wholesale or additive, but this does not significantly impair understanding.

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 has 0% description coverage and only specifies 'array of objects' with additionalProperties true. The description compensates fully by specifying the exact object structure: {name, domain, path, value, expirationDate}. This adds essential meaning beyond the 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 description uses a specific verb and resource: 'Replace the cookies used when downloading .torrent files.' This clearly distinguishes the tool from the sibling qbittorrent_app_get_cookies and other setter tools.

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 clear context (when downloading .torrent files) and implies the action (replacing cookies), though it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion criteria. This fits the 'clear context, no exclusions' level.

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