qbittorrent_app_set_preferences

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

Annotations indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive (destructiveHint=false). The description adds value by explaining the partial update behavior and providing value type constraints (strings quoted, integers/booleans not), which goes beyond the 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 two sentences with a clear action verb, concise usage rule, and a helpful example. Every part earns its place with no redundancy or 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?

The tool is a simple preference update with an output schema present, so the description need not explain return values. It covers the key aspects: what it does, how to specify changes, and value type handling. Minor gaps like error handling are not critical for this straightforward operation.

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 has a single 'json' object parameter with 0% description coverage, so the description is the sole source of semantic meaning. It effectively explains the format (the 'json' argument) and provides a concrete example, plus rules for quoting strings versus integers/booleans, fully compensating for the schema's lack of detail.

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 'Update application preferences' with a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling qbittorrent_app_get_preferences by using 'Update' vs implied 'Get', but does not explicitly name the alternative.

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 instruction 'Pass only the keys you want to change' gives a clear usage guideline for partial updates, and the example demonstrates how to call it. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus get_preferences or other preference-related tools, leaving the comparison implied.

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