dashbrr_get_jellyfin_summary

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

Beyond the readOnlyHint annotation, the description adds valuable context: the requirement that instance_id must be type-prefixed (e.g., jellyfin-main), and what data is included in the response. This exceeds bare annotation coverage, though it does not discuss error cases or response size.

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, no fluff. The first sentence states the main purpose and key data points; the second clarifies the critical parameter format. Information is front-loaded and each sentence 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?

Given there is an output schema that documents return values, the description does not need to explain output shape. It covers what the tool does, critical parameter semantics, and safety profile via annotations. Slight gap: no mention of prerequisites (e.g., service availability), but overall complete for a single-parameter read tool.

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 provides only a string type for instance_id with no description. The tool description compensates by explaining the required type-prefix format with a concrete example. This gives the agent actionable guidance beyond the raw schema, though it does not enumerate all valid prefixes.

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 provides Jellyfin system info plus active sessions with specific details like play state, now playing item, and transcoding. This is a specific verb+resource+scope, and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools by naming Jellyfin and listing included data.

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 implies usage context (when you need Jellyfin system info/sessions) but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives like dashbrr_get_plex_sessions. No exclusion or alternative guidance is provided, only a requirement for the instance_id format.

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