radarr_get_moviefile

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes this as a read operation, and the description simply restates 'Fetch' without adding behavioral context such as 404 handling or return details. No contradiction exists, but no additional transparency is provided.

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?

One short sentence with no filler. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, making it easy to parse.

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 getter with a readOnly annotation and an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, it lacks usage context and nuanced behavior, so it does not fully help an agent decide when to invoke this tool.

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?

Schema description coverage is 0%, and the description only says 'by id' without explaining what the id refers to or how to obtain it. The single parameter is basic, but the description fails to add meaningful semantics beyond the literal schema.

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 verb 'Fetch' and resource 'movie files by id' clearly indicate a single-item retrieval. The phrase 'a single' distinguishes it from the sibling list_moviefile, though the grammar 'movie files' is awkward.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_moviefile. It does not mention prerequisites like needing a known movie file ID or that listing should be used when no ID is available.

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