radarr_get_remotepathmapping

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already establishes the read-only safety profile, and the description's verb 'Fetch' is consistent. However, the description adds no additional behavioral context such as error handling or return format, though the output schema likely covers return values.

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 no wasted words. Every term ('Fetch', 'single', 'remote path mappings', 'by id') contributes to understanding the tool's purpose.

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 simple single-parameter getter with an output schema and readOnlyHint annotation, the description is complete enough. It states exactly what the tool retrieves. Minor omission: no explicit mention of behavior when ID is not found, but this is likely acceptable for a straightforward fetch.

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 0% schema description coverage, the description's phrase 'by id' clarifies that the 'id' parameter identifies the mapping to fetch. This adds meaning beyond the bare integer type, but does not elaborate on ID specifics or format.

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 resource 'remote path mappings' with scope 'by id', clearly distinguishing this from sibling tools like list (which fetches all) and create/update/delete mutations.

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?

The description implies usage for fetching a single mapping by ID, but does not explicitly mention when to use this over the list tool or provide any exclusions. Context is clear but guidance is implicit rather than explicit.

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