radarr_get_config_downloadclient_by_id

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes the tool as safe for reads, and the description's 'Fetch' aligns with that. However, the description adds no further behavioral context—no mention of error conditions, permissions, or side effects. With the annotation covering safety, the description contributes nothing beyond what is already known.

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 a single, concise sentence with no redundancy. It is appropriately brief for a simple get-by-id operation and is well-structured.

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 too terse to fully orient an agent among similar tools. It does not clarify that this endpoint is specifically for 'config' download clients (as the name suggests) versus general download clients, nor does it mention behavior for non-existent ids or the existence of an output schema. The ambiguity with radarr_get_downloadclient is unresolved.

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 description's 'by id' clarifies that the single 'id' parameter identifies the target downloadclient. Since the schema only has an integer id with no description, this is a minimal but adequate semantic connection, though it adds little over the parameter name itself.

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 uses a specific verb 'Fetch' and identifies the resource 'downloadclient' keyed by id. It clearly states the operation, but it does not explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like radarr_get_downloadclient, and it omits the 'config' qualifier from the tool name, leaving a slight ambiguity.

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 such as radarr_get_downloadclient or listing endpoints. There is no mention of exclusions, prerequisites, or context, so the agent must infer usage solely from the tool name and minimal description.

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