radarr_bulk_update_customformat

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

The annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, indicating a write operation. The description adds 'WRITE: this modifies your Radarr instance,' which is a natural-language restatement of the existing annotation rather than a new behavioral disclosure. It omits crucial details such as whether the update overwrites all custom formats or only those specified, whether it is idempotent, or what side effects occur.

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 very short and front-loaded with the core action. The first sentence 'Bulk update custom formats' essentially restates the tool name, which is somewhat redundant, but the second sentence adds a useful warning. There is no unnecessary verbosity, so it earns a high score for conciseness, though it could be more informative.

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 tool is a bulk write operation with a complex body parameter, but the description does not explain how to construct the request, which custom formats are affected, or how this differs from the single-update sibling. While an output schema exists (so return values need not be described), the input side is severely underdocumented, making it difficult for an agent to invoke 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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate for the lack of parameter documentation. The only parameter is a generic 'body' object with additionalProperties true, and the description provides no information about its expected structure, required fields, or how to specify which custom formats to update. This is a significant gap.

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 states 'Bulk update custom formats.' This clearly identifies the action (update), the resource (custom formats), and the scope (bulk). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like radarr_update_customformat (single update) and radarr_bulk_delete_customformat (delete operation).

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention when a bulk update is appropriate, nor does it reference radarr_update_customformat for single updates or any prerequisites. The 'WRITE' warning is a safety note, not usage guidance.

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