qbittorrent_torrents_set_share_limits

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

Annotations already indicate this is a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive (destructiveHint=false). The description adds useful context like the 'all' special value for hashes and the sentinel meanings for limits (-2, -1), which go beyond the schema but do not disclose broader side effects or prerequisites.

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, front-loaded with the primary action, and every clause adds needed information (scope, parameter meanings, sentinel values). No filler or repetition of schema defaults.

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 setter tool with four params and an output schema available, the description covers the necessary semantics, including special values, units, and the 'all' option. It is complete and self-sufficient alongside the input schema and annotations.

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 fully covers all four parameters: explains 'hashes' (pipe-separated or 'all'), 'ratio_limit' (share ratio), 'seeding_time_limit' and 'inactive_seeding_time_limit' (minutes), and defines -2/-1 semantics. This is exemplary compensation for missing schema descriptions.

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 starts with 'Set share limits for torrents', which is a specific verb+resource pair. It clearly identifies the action (set) and the target (share limits) and distinguishes from sibling tools like set_download_limit or set_upload_limit by focusing on share-specific parameters.

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 usage by stating 'Set share limits' and detailing the parameters, but it does not explicitly state when to choose this over other limit-setting tools or provide exclusions/alternatives. The context is clear but not enriched with comparative guidance.

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