radarr_get_config_naming

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already indicates a safe read operation, but the description adds no additional behavioral context. It does not disclose that the tool returns the current naming configuration or any other relevant details beyond 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 extremely terse, but this is under-specification rather than purposeful conciseness. It is a fragment rather than a complete sentence and omits essential context.

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 tool with no parameters and a readOnly hint, the description should still clearly state that it retrieves the naming configuration settings. The current text is too thin to fully guide an agent, especially given the ambiguity with sibling tools.

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?

With zero parameters, there are no schema details to expand on. However, 'List naming' does not clarify what 'naming' refers to, so it adds minimal semantic value beyond the tool 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 'List naming' uses a clear verb but the resource 'naming' is vague and unqualified. It doesn't specify that this tool retrieves the naming configuration, making it ambiguous alongside sibling tools like radarr_list_config_naming_examples.

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 usage guidance is provided. The description gives no context on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as radarr_get_config_naming_by_id or radarr_list_config_naming_examples.

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