radarr_list_exclusions_paged

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already discloses the safe read-only nature. The description adds that query parameters include sort_key and sort_direction, which is minor behavioral info. However, it omits pagination behavior (e.g., default page size, max page size) which would be expected for a 'paged' tool.

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 front-loaded, with no fluff. However, it is so brief that it sacrifices necessary detail, making it minimally acceptable rather than exemplary.

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 is named 'paged' but the description fails to mention pagination, the context is incomplete. The agent cannot determine key behaviors like paging, default page size, or how this differs from the non-paged list tool. Output schema helps with returns, but the overall context is lacking.

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 names sort_key and sort_direction, omitting page and page_size entirely. It does not explain the meaning, allowed values, or defaults for any parameter, leaving significant ambiguity for the agent.

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 (List) and the resource (import list exclusions). It is specific enough to distinguish it from non-related tools, but it does not explicitly mention pagination, which is the distinguishing feature from the sibling radarr_list_exclusions.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that this is the paginated version of list exclusions, nor does it compare with radarr_list_exclusions or radarr_get_exclusions. The agent is left without context for tool selection.

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