Sonarr: History

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

Annotations already indicate `readOnlyHint=true` and `openWorldHint=false`. The description adds that results are 'newest first', which is a behavioral detail beyond annotations. No contradictions; description adds some value.

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 sentences, front-loaded with purpose, no wasted words. Every sentence provides essential information about scope and alternatives.

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 simple tool (one optional parameter, no output schema) is adequately described for typical use. Missing details about return format, but given no output schema and common understanding of 'history', it is sufficient.

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% with a single parameter `page_size` fully described. The tool description adds no further meaning to the parameter, so baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 'Get recent Sonarr history (newest first)', providing a specific verb and resource. It also distinguishes from sibling tools like `sonarr_history_series` and `sonarr_history_mark_failed`, making the tool's scope unambiguous.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use this tool (general history) vs. per-resource scope (`sonarr_history_series`), and when to use `sonarr_history_mark_failed` for wrong-grab events, providing clear context and alternatives.

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