radarr_delete_movie

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

The description repeats the annotation's destructiveHint (DESTRUCTIVE: this deletes data) without adding new behavioral context. It does not disclose that the delete_files parameter can permanently remove files from disk, or whether the action is reversible. Since annotations already cover the destructive nature, the description adds little value beyond the structured metadata.

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 concise at two sentences, with the primary action front-loaded. The 'DESTRUCTIVE' warning is somewhat redundant given the annotations but does not add significant verbosity. It is appropriately brief for a simple delete operation, though it could better use the space for parameter semantics.

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 description is incomplete given the tool's complexity. While an output schema exists (so return values need not be described), the description fails to mention critical side-effect options like delete_files (which deletes movie files from disk) and add_import_exclusion. For a destructive operation with multiple boolean toggles, more context is essential for safe and correct use.

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 0% description coverage, and the tool description provides no explanations for the three parameters (id, delete_files, add_import_exclusion). The description must compensate for the missing schema descriptions but fails entirely, leaving the agent without guidance on what each parameter does beyond their names.

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 action and resource: 'Delete movies.' This is a specific verb+resource pairing that distinguishes it from related operations like deleting movie files (radarr_delete_moviefile). However, it does not explicitly differentiate from radarr_bulk_delete_movie or clarify that it operates on a single movie, so it loses a point for not fully disambiguating among siblings.

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 bulk delete, nor any mention of prerequisites or context. The description offers no 'when to use' or 'when not to use' instructions, leaving the agent to infer usage solely from the name.

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