radarr_create_customformat

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

With annotations already indicating readOnlyHint=false, the description explicitly states 'WRITE: this modifies your Radarr instance,' which adds plain-language confirmation of the write behavior. However, it provides no additional context such as side effects, required permissions, or reversibility, so it adds only marginal value beyond the annotations.

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 extremely concise and front-loaded with the purpose. The two sentences each carry relevant information: the action and the write warning. No words are wasted.

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 this is a create operation with a generic free-form body and no parameter descriptions, the description is far too minimal. It does not explain the body structure, reference the schema endpoint, or describe expected outcomes. The agent lacks essential information to use the tool correctly, despite the presence of an output schema.

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 generic 'body' object with additionalProperties true, and the description offers zero parameter guidance. Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description does not compensate by describing required fields, structure, or pointing to the schema tool. An agent would have no idea what to put in the body.

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 'Create custom formats' uses a specific verb and resource, clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like update_customformat, delete_customformat, and get_customformat. It unambiguously states what the tool does.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor any prerequisites like fetching the schema first. It does not mention using radarr_get_customformat_schema or any context for when creation is appropriate.

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