dashbrr_delete_sonarr_queue_item

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

The annotations already flag this as destructive and not read-only. The description adds valuable context by explaining that options are applied only when set to true and detailing the effect of each flag (e.g., remove_from_client, blocklist). It does not discuss all consequences, but together with annotations it sufficiently discloses behavior.

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?

Three focused sentences, with the main action first, then prerequisites, then option explanations. No unnecessary information; the description is efficient and well-organized.

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 6-parameter destructive tool with no output schema and no schema descriptions, this description covers all parameters, provides usage prerequisites, and explains option behavior. It is sufficiently complete for an agent to invoke the tool correctly.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates fully by defining `id`, `instance_id`, and all four boolean flags, including their semantics. Every parameter from the schema is explained, making the parameter set unambiguous.

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 the tool deletes an item from the Sonarr download queue, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes from sibling tools like dashbrr_delete_radarr_queue_item by naming Sonarr explicitly.

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 specifies that `id` comes from dashbrr_get_sonarr_queue and that `instance_id` must be type-prefixed (e.g., sonarr-1), providing clear context for when and how to use it. It does not explicitly contrast with sibling delete tools, but the name and prerequisite make appropriate usage clear.

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