sonarr_grab

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It adds the important requirement of user confirmation, but does not explain what happens after confirmation (e.g., download initiation, state changes), error conditions, or idempotency. The behavioral transparency is minimal beyond the confirmation note.

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 consists of two concise sentences, with the purpose stated first and the behavioral requirement second. Every sentence adds value, and there is no wasted or redundant text.

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?

Given the lack of output schema and annotations, the description covers the primary action and the user confirmation requirement. However, it does not explain the return behavior, error cases, or prerequisites (e.g., needing a release guid from sonarr_search_releases, which is only implied by the parameter description in the schema). The tool is relatively simple, so the description is adequate but not complete.

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%—both parameters have clear descriptions (guid from sonarr_search_releases, indexerId from the indexer). The tool description adds no additional information about the parameters beyond what is already in the schema, so it meets the baseline for high coverage.

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 uses a specific verb 'Start downloading' and resource 'series episode release in Sonarr', clearly stating the tool's action. It distinguishes from sibling tools like sonarr_search_releases (searching) and sonarr_add (adding series), which have different purposes.

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 mentions the user confirmation requirement ('Requires user confirmation before calling'), which is a usage guideline. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., after sonarr_search_releases), nor does it describe scenarios where the tool should not be used.

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