list_series

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It clearly communicates that the default result is compact summaries rather than full objects, enumerates the summary fields, and indicates the scope is the entire library. It does not mention that the 'detailed' parameter can override the summary behavior, but that is visible in the schema and does not contradict the description.

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 with no filler. The output scope and format are stated up front, and the sibling alternative is given in a compact second sentence. Every part 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 read-only list tool with four optional parameters and no output schema, the description gives the essential default output shape, field list, and the key sibling distinction. It is slightly light on behavior when 'detailed' is used, but the schema covers that, so nothing required for correct invocation is missing.

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 all four parameters well. The description adds useful context about the default compact output shape, but does not add per-parameter semantics beyond what the schema provides. Baseline 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 a specific verb ('List'), a specific resource ('all series in the Sonarr library'), and the output form ('compact summaries') with an explicit field list. It also distinguishes itself from get_series immediately, so an agent can tell these sibling tools apart without opening their schemas.

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 explicitly names get_series as the alternative when full objects with seasons, images, and alternate titles are needed. This gives the agent a clear decision rule for choosing between list_series and its closest sibling.

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