dashbrr_get_prowlarr_stats

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes safety. The description adds valuable behavioral context by specifying the exact metrics (grab/fail counts, indexer count) and the critical type-prefix requirement for instance_id. It does not disclose additional side effects, but none are expected for a read-only stats endpoint with an output schema.

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 consists of two purposeful sentences: the first front-loads the tool's output, the second details the critical input constraint. No wasted words, perfectly sized for the tool's simplicity.

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 the tool has only one parameter, an output schema, and a read-only annotation, the description covers all necessary context: what data is returned and how to properly specify the instance_id. There are no significant gaps.

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?

Although the schema only defines instance_id as a string with no description, the description compensates fully by explaining that it must be 'type-prefixed' and providing a concrete example ('prowlarr-0'). This is essential information for correct invocation and adds meaning well beyond the raw schema.

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 returns 'Prowlarr grab/fail counts and indexer count', specifying both the resource (Prowlarr) and the exact data. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like get_prowlarr_indexers that likely return indexer lists rather than aggregate stats.

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 the use case (retrieving Prowlarr stats) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool over alternatives or mention exclusions. The instance_id format requirement is a usage detail, but there is no explicit guidance on tool selection among siblings.

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