get_import_list_schema

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

With no annotations, the description must show side effects and return behavior itself; 'List' makes the read-only nature clear, and 'with the fields each one takes' describes the returned content. It omits details like exact response structure, but for a schema endpoint this is reasonable and not misleading.

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 tight sentences: the first states the full scope of what is returned, the second states the intended follow-up action. There is no filler or repetition of schema details.

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 tool is simple (one optional parameter, no output schema), and the description explains the list content and intended use well. It does not explicitly say that passing implementation narrows the response, but the schema already covers that, so the overall definition is complete enough for an agent.

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?

The description adds context that omitting the implementation returns all implementations, while the schema's own description already documents the single-implementation filter with examples. Since schema coverage is 100%, the baseline of 3 is appropriate; the description reinforces rather than adds significant new meaning.

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 names a specific verb ('List'), a clear resource ('every import list implementation Sonarr supports'), and the output's purpose ('fields each one takes'). It also connects directly to create_import_list, which distinguishes it from general list/get tools like list_import_lists and get_import_list.

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 states the primary use case: use the returned schema as a template for create_import_list. It does not enumerate exclusions or compare against get_indexer_schema/get_download_client_schema, but the import-list scope makes the intended context clear.

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