remove_blocklist_item

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

With no annotations, the description takes on the full disclosure burden. It states the mutating effect (removes one blocklist entry) and the meaningful behavioral consequence (the release may be grabbed again). It does not discuss reversibility or errors, but for a simple single-item deletion these omissions are minor.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence conveys the action, scope, and outcome with no filler. Every word contributes to the tool's behavior.

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 low complexity, one required parameter, and no output schema, the description plus schema is nearly complete. It could add a hint that the id comes from get_blocklist, but that is easily inferred from the sibling tools.

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 only parameter, id, is already fully documented in the schema as 'Blocklist entry id', giving 100% schema coverage. The description adds no additional syntax or format guidance, so the baseline 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 gives a specific verb (Remove), a specific resource (one release from the blocklist), and a clear intended consequence (so Sonarr may grab it again). The word 'one' distinguishes it from the plural sibling remove_blocklist_items, making tool selection 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?

It clearly implies the tool is for unblocking a single entry so a release becomes grabbable again. It does not explicitly state when not to use it or point to remove_blocklist_items for bulk removal, so it lacks fully explicit routing.

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