qui_add_peers

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

There are no annotations, so the description must convey side effects and behavioral details. It only states 'Call endpoint' without mentioning that this mutates state, requires authentication, or has any rate limits or associated risks. The effect of adding peers is not explained.

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, front-loaded with the endpoint and exact argument passing convention. No wasted words, easy to parse.

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?

While the description names the exact endpoint and argument structure, it omits critical details such as required path variables (instanceID), the request body schema, and any expected response. An agent would struggle to construct a valid call without additional context. The output schema exists but the input semantics remain underspecified.

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 a single generic 'arguments' object with 0% coverage, so the description's instruction to pass path variables, query values, and a JSON body adds structure beyond the schema. However, it doesn't identify which path variables, query parameters, or body fields are expected, leaving the agent to guess.

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 the tool calls a specific endpoint (POST /instances/{instanceID}/torrents/add-peers) to add peers to a torrent. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like qui_ban_peers or qui_get_torrent_peers by naming the exact action and resource.

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 versus alternatives. It doesn't mention prerequisites, typical scenarios, or reasons to prefer this over other peer-related tools. The description only explains how to invoke it, not when.

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