radarr_get_rootfolder

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read. The description adds no additional behavioral context such as error handling, pagination, or response specifics. It simply restates the obvious action.

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 short sentence, which is economical and front-loaded. The minor grammar issue ('folders' instead of 'folder') is a small flaw but does not impede understanding.

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's low complexity (one required parameter), the presence of an output schema, and the readOnlyHint annotation, the description is sufficient. It covers the core purpose without needing to explain return values, as those are likely defined in the output schema.

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 one 'id' integer parameter with 0% description coverage. The description's 'by id' indicates that the parameter is the root folder ID, adding some semantic meaning. However, it does not elaborate on constraints or the meaning beyond this basic association.

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'), the resource ('root folders'), and scope ('single ... by id'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like radarr_list_rootfolder. It communicates exactly what the tool does.

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 phrase 'by id' implies this tool is used when you have a specific root folder ID, which is a clear context. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or contrast it with alternatives like radarr_list_rootfolder.

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