add_torrent

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

With no annotations the description carries the full behavioral burden, and it discloses almost nothing: no indication that the add starts the torrent by default, that duplicates may be rejected, whether the operation requires elevated permissions, or how failures surface. The phrase 'or several at once' hints at batch behavior but doesn't say what happens per-URL on partial failure.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler, which suits a simple add operation. It is arguably too terse for a five-parameter mutation tool, so not a perfect score.

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?

An output schema exists so return values need not be described, and all five parameters are documented in the schema. What's missing is the behavioral context a mutation tool needs: whether the add is destructive/irreversible, default start behavior, and duplicate handling.

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 coverage is 100%, so baselines apply; the schema itself documents stopped, auto_tmm, category, and save_path in detail. The description only adds that urls accepts magnet or http(s) links and may be multiple, which slightly reinforces the schema without adding new meaning.

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?

Specific verb (Add) plus resource (torrent) and accepted input forms (magnet or URL), so the agent knows exactly what the call does. It does not, however, distinguish itself from siblings like control_torrents or delete_torrents beyond the verb itself.

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 statement of when to use this versus alternatives, no prerequisites, no note about duplicate torrents or auth requirements. The only implied usage is that you have a magnet/URL to submit.

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