qui_add_torrent

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only states the endpoint call and does not mention that this adds a torrent, potential side effects, authentication requirements, or response behavior. The POST method implies mutation, but no further transparency is given.

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 no redundancy. The first sentence names the endpoint and HTTP method; the second details argument structure. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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 has no annotations, a sparse schema, and an output schema. The description is adequate for basic invocation but lacks context on behavior, usage scenarios, and parameter semantics beyond generic structure. It would not fully inform an AI agent when to choose this tool over siblings.

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 provides only a generic 'arguments' object with no documented properties (0% coverage). The description compensates by explaining how to structure arguments (path directly, query in arguments.params, body in arguments.body), which is useful. However, it does not enumerate specific query parameters or body schema, leaving significant gaps.

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 identifies the tool as a POST call to /instances/{instanceID}/torrents/, specifying a verb and resource. However, it does not explicitly state the action 'add torrent' beyond the tool name, nor does it differentiate from sibling tools like qui_create_torrent or qui_add_torrent_trackers.

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 parameter-passing instructions but no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the endpoint.

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