Set global download and upload speed limits in qBittorrent and use 0 to remove either limit, so you can control bandwidth usage.
Set global download and/or upload speed limits. Pass 0 to remove a limit.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| upload_limit | No | Global upload limit in bytes/sec (0 = unlimited) | |
| download_limit | No | Global download limit in bytes/sec (0 = unlimited) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses only that the limits are 'global' and that 0 removes a limit (already stated in the schema); it says nothing about whether the change persists across restarts, which sessions/torrents are affected, required permissions, or whether other rate settings are touched.
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 short sentences, purpose front-loaded ahead of the 0-value rule, with no filler. Every sentence earns its place.
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 two-optional-parameter mutation with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers what the tool does and the key 0-value convention. It is nearly complete, missing only a note that omitting both parameters is a no-op and how it relates to alternate-speed mode.
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 100%, so both parameters and their 0=unlimited semantics are already fully documented in the schema. The description's 'Pass 0 to remove a limit' merely restates that convention, adding no units, ranges, or interaction details beyond the structured fields.
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?
States a specific verb and resource ('Set global ... speed limits') and scopes it as global, so the agent knows this is a client-wide setting rather than a per-torrent one. It does not differentiate from the sibling toggle_alt_speed, which also manipulates speed behavior, leaving some ambiguity about which to pick.
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?
'Pass 0 to remove a limit' gives one actionable usage rule, and 'and/or' implies at least one parameter should be supplied. However, there is no guidance on when to use this versus toggle_alt_speed, no mention of prerequisites, and no note on what happens if both parameters are omitted (both are optional).
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.