radarr_delete_indexer

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

The description says 'DESTRUCTIVE: this deletes data,' which essentially reiterates the destructiveHint=true annotation without adding new context. It does not mention irreversibility, cascading effects, or any permissions needed. With annotations already covering the destructive nature, the description adds minimal value beyond structured data.

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 brief—two short sentences—and front-loads the action. It is not verbose, but the second sentence is redundant given the annotations, so it does not fully earn its place. Still, the structure is clear and 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?

For a destructive delete tool with one parameter and an output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks information about what the ID identifies, any side effects, or whether the operation can fail. The annotations cover the destructive flag, but the description does not adequately complete the picture for an agent to safely invoke the tool.

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 has one required 'id' integer with no description (0% schema description coverage). The description does not explain what 'id' refers to (e.g., indexer ID) or require any format. The burden falls on the description to clarify parameters, and it fails to do so, leaving the agent to guess.

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 'Delete indexers' with a specific verb and resource. It clearly distinguishes this from sibling tools like 'list_indexer' or 'update_indexer' by declaring the delete operation. The name itself reinforces the purpose, and the description adds a clear action-target pairing.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'radarr_bulk_delete_indexer' or how to specify which indexer to delete. The description simply states the action without context, prerequisites, or exclusions. A user would have to infer from the name that it deletes a specific indexer by ID.

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