add_series

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does reveal a two-stage behavior: resolving metadata via lookup, then posting with the supplied settings. However, it does not mention side effects of adding a series, whether duplicate detection exists, what happens on invalid IDs, or any permission/authorization requirements.

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 is two sentences with no wasted words. It front-loads the primary action and resource, then immediately gives the prerequisite data-fetching steps. 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 10-parameter write operation with no output schema and no annotations, the description provides the essential workflow, required inputs, and prerequisites. It still leaves some gaps such as expected return value and post-add behavior, but the full parameter schema compensates for most optional details.

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 the schema already documents every parameter in detail. The description adds mild reinforcement by naming tvdb_id, root folder, and quality profile as the core inputs, but it does not materially extend the parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 states a specific verb ('Add'), a concrete resource ('a new series to the library'), and the key input ('by TVDB id'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_series, update_series, and delete_series, so an agent can understand its role without opening the schema.

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?

It explicitly instructs the agent to call list_root_folders and list_quality_profiles first to get valid ids, which is a clear prerequisite workflow. It does not explicitly state when to avoid this tool in favor of update_series or other alternatives, so it lacks full exclusionary guidance.

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