radarr_import_movie

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

Annotations already set readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds 'WRITE: this modifies your Radarr instance,' which is largely redundant. It doesn't explain what the import operation does (e.g., add/update movies, trigger searches) or disclose any other side effects beyond modification.

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 concise and well-structured: a clear first sentence stating the action and input format, followed by a brief WRITE warning. No unnecessary words or information.

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?

The tool performs a non-trivial bulk import operation, yet the description is minimal. It omits details about constructing movie resources, handling duplicates, prerequisites, and what the response represents. While an output schema exists, the description fails to contextualize the operation relative to sibling tools and the overall workflow.

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%, so the description carries the burden. It states that the body is a list of movie resources, which clarifies the top-level type, but it doesn't explain the structure of a movie resource (e.g., required fields like tmdbId or qualityProfileId), leaving the agent without enough detail to construct a valid request.

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 ('Import') and resource ('movies'), and clarifies that the body is a list of movie resources. It conveys the core purpose clearly, though it doesn't explicitly distinguish from sibling tools like radarr_add_movie or radarr_import_list_movie.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The WRITE warning only highlights side effects, not usage context. There's no mention of bulk import use cases, prerequisites, or differences from similar tools.

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