dashbrr_get_prowlarr_indexers

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

The `readOnlyHint` annotation already establishes that this is a safe read operation. The description adds transparency by disclosing the exact fields returned and the requirement that `instance_id` be type-prefixed. This is adequate for a simple getter, though it does not mention error behavior or ordering.

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. The first sentence clearly states the tool's purpose and output fields, while the second provides a crucial parameter constraint. There is no redundant information.

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?

The description covers the return fields and a key parameter detail, and an output schema exists, so return values need not be fully detailed. However, it lacks any guidance on when to choose this over a sibling like `dashbrr_get_prowlarr_stats`, which is a notable gap given many 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 schema provides no description for `instance_id` (0% coverage), but the description compensates somewhat by explaining the type-prefix requirement with an example. However, it does not define what constitutes a valid type prefix or how to obtain the ID, so the compensation is partial.

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 identifies the tool as returning a Prowlarr indexer list with specific fields (id, name, enable, priority, response time, grab/query counts), which is a specific resource and scope. It does not explicitly differentiate from sibling `dashbrr_get_prowlarr_stats`, but the field list implies a distinct purpose.

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 by stating it returns an indexer list and notes that `instance_id` must be type-prefixed, which is a prerequisite. However, it does not provide explicit when-to-use guidance or mention alternatives like `dashbrr_get_prowlarr_stats`, leaving the agent to infer based on tool naming.

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