qbittorrent_torrents_rename_folder

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

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false, so the mutation is expected. The description adds the important behavioral detail that paths are interpreted relative to the torrent root, which is beyond the annotations and helpful for correct invocation.

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?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the action, and every word adds value. No filler or repetition.

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 simple, with 3 required parameters and an output schema present (so return values need not be described). The description covers the key operational constraint (relative paths) and is complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 0% description coverage, so the description must compensate. It explicitly clarifies that old_path and new_path are relative to the torrent root, which is essential semantics not present in the schema. It does not explain 'hash', but the name makes its role as torrent identifier obvious.

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?

Clearly states the action 'rename a folder inside a torrent' with specific verb and resource. The mention of 'relative paths from the torrent root' adds precise scope, and the term 'folder' distinguishes it from the sibling tool 'qbittorrent_torrents_rename_file'.

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?

Provides clear context: paths are relative to torrent root, defining when to use the tool. However, it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions (e.g., 'for files use rename_file'), 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.