dashbrr_get_plex_pin

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

The description adds behavioral context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation by explaining the polling nature and the authToken completion condition. It informs the agent that repeated calls are safe and when to stop, which is valuable for a read-only polling tool.

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 two concise sentences that front-load the core action and provide a clear completion condition. Every sentence contributes meaningful information without redundancy.

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 single-parameter polling tool with an output schema and readOnlyHint, the description covers the purpose, prerequisite, success condition, and termination point. It does not mention rate limits or error cases, but these are not critical given the tool's simplicity and the annotation's safety profile.

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 has one integer parameter pin_id with no description, and the description does not explicitly define it. The reference to 'Plex PIN created with dashbrr_create_plex_pin' implies pin_id is the identifier from that call, but this is left to inference. Given 0% schema coverage, the description should be more explicit.

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 polls the status of a Plex PIN created with dashbrr_create_plex_pin. This specifies the exact verb (poll), resource (Plex PIN status), and context, distinguishing it from the sibling create tool.

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 establishes the prerequisite by referencing dashbrr_create_plex_pin and clarifies the success condition, implying when to use it. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use instructions or alternative tools, but the guidance is clear enough for this context.

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