radarr_get_config_metadata_by_id

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already informs the agent this is a safe read operation. The description adds no additional behavioral context, such as behavior on missing ids, response format, or any other caveats, and does not contradict the annotation.

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 sentence with minimal waste. However, it contains a grammatical error ('providers' instead of 'provider'), which slightly undermines clarity.

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 simple fetch-by-id tool with an output schema and readOnlyHint, the description is mostly adequate. However, it does not mention that this is specifically for configuration metadata or how it differs from the list variant, leaving some ambiguity given the large sibling set.

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 a single 'id' parameter with no description (0% coverage). The description only says 'by id', which adds little beyond the parameter name; it fails to explain what id represents or how to obtain it.

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 (Fetch) and the resource (a single metadata provider) with an id parameter, distinguishing it from list/get-all siblings. The grammar error ('providers' vs 'provider') is minor, and the 'by id' clarifies the selection.

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 like radarr_get_config_metadata or radarr_get_metadata. It simply states what it does without any context, exclusions, or mention of alternative tools.

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