radarr_get_indexer_schema

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already communicates read-only safety. The description adds that the schema contains available fields/options, which is consistent but not highly revealing. It does not disclose additional behavioral details such as whether the schema varies by indexer type or return format.

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 that immediately states the purpose. No wasted words.

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?

Given the tool has an output schema (so return values are documented elsewhere) and is a simple read-only schema retrieval, the description is sufficient. It captures the essential purpose without additional requirements.

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 tool takes no parameters, so the schema coverage is trivially 100%. The description does not need to explain parameters; the baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and nothing detracts from 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 uses the specific verb 'Return' and identifies the resource as 'indexers schema' with clarification of available fields/options. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like radarr_get_indexer, which returns a specific indexer, and aligns with the tool name.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternative schema endpoints (e.g., radarr_get_downloadclient_schema, radarr_get_importlist_schema) or when to use it in a workflow (e.g., before creating an indexer). The usage context is only implicit in the tool's name and purpose.

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