radarr_create_exclusions

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, and the description adds the explicit warning 'WRITE: this modifies your Radarr instance,' which is consistent. However, no further behavioral details are provided—such as idempotency, side effects on import list processing, or permission requirements—so the description 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 one short sentence, front-loaded with the purpose and a clear write warning. Every word earns its place, and there is no redundant or tangential content.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the tool has a complex, unconstrained body parameter that is completely undocumented. The description provides only a high-level purpose and no information about required payload fields, request construction, or expected behavior—making it inadequate for an agent to invoke reliably. The sibling tools indicate surrounding context, but this description itself is far too sparse.

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 input schema contains a single free-form 'body' object with additionalProperties true and zero property description coverage. The description fails to compensate by listing any expected fields (e.g., movieId, title) or the structure of the request body, leaving the agent with no semantic guidance for constructing a valid call.

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 action ('Create') and the target resource ('import list exclusions'), so the purpose is understandable. However, it does not distinguish this tool from the sibling 'radarr_bulk_create_exclusions' (or update/delete variants), leaving ambiguity about whether this is for single or multiple exclusions.

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 given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that this is likely for single exclusions while bulk_create_exclusions handles multiple, nor does it suggest when to prefer update or delete. The agent receives no contextual help for choosing the right tool.

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