rescan_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 communicates that the rescan will detect both additions and removals, implying the database will be updated to reflect external file changes. However, it does not disclose whether this is destructive, asynchronous, or what side effects occur (e.g., removing series entries, triggering post-processing).

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 a single sentence that front-loads the action and scope, with no filler or redundant information. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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 simple tool with one optional parameter, the description covers the core action and scope. However, with no output schema and no annotations, it omits any mention of the return value (e.g., whether it returns a command object) and does not clarify the operational context, such as whether it runs synchronously or asynchronously.

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 schema already documents the single series_id parameter with its meaning, and schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no new parameter semantics beyond echoing the 'one series or all series' behavior already present in the schema, so the baseline score 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 states a specific verb ('Rescan'), a clear resource ('the folder of one series or all series'), and a specific purpose ('to pick up files added or removed outside Sonarr'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like refresh_series or search_series, which serve 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 phrase 'to pick up files added or removed outside Sonarr' provides clear context for when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or state when not to use it, so it stops short of full guidance.

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