transmission-mcp

set_torrent_labels

Assign labels to a specific torrent to organize your transmission downloads.

Instructions

Set labels for a torrent.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "torrent_id": "<torrent_id>",
      "labels": "<labels>"
    },
    "name": "set_torrent_labels"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`labels`	Yes
`torrent_id`	Yes

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

Changed1 schema field changedv1.1.0Jul 21, 2026
- addedInput schema / additionalProperties
```
Added value: +false
```
First observedJan 15, 2026

TDQS

C2.6/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations exist, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It fails to mention side effects such as overwriting existing labels, authentication needs, or rate limits. The lack of detail limits an agent's understanding of the tool's impact.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise at a single sentence, but conciseness should not come at the expense of completeness. It is minimally viable but could be restructured to include key details while remaining brief.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple tool with 2 parameters and an output schema, the description is incomplete. It does not explain the effect on existing labels (overwrite vs merge), expected return values, or error conditions. A more complete description would aid correct invocation.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, yet the description adds no meaning beyond parameter names. It does not explain the format of torrent_id, what values labels can take, or constraints (e.g., maximum label length). The output schema exists but is not leveraged for parameter clarity.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states 'Set labels for a torrent' which identifies the action and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like add_torrent or remove_torrent. However, it could be more specific by clarifying whether labels are overwritten or appended.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

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. For example, there is no indication of whether labels are replaced or merged, nor any context about required permissions or constraints.

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

Deploy Server