radarr_list_queue

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already covers the safety profile. The description adds no further behavioral context, such as pagination behavior, default filtering, or whether include_movie affects output. It merely states the action, so it adds no value beyond the annotation.

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 concise sentence followed by a list of parameter names. It is front-loaded and efficient, but the parameter list is somewhat arbitrary and incomplete, so it doesn't fully earn its place.

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?

Despite having an output schema, this is a complex tool with 11 optional parameters. The description fails to explain key behaviors like pagination, sorting, filtering, or inclusion flags, making it inadequate for an agent to invoke correctly without additional inference.

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 must compensate but only lists 7 of 11 parameter names without adding any meaning. It omits page, page_size, include_movie, and include_unknown_movie_items, and provides no types, formats, or examples, so it barely helps the agent understand the parameters.

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 tool lists download client queue items, which is a specific resource and action. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like radarr_get_queue_details or radarr_get_queue_status, so it's clear but lacks sibling distinction.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It simply states the action and lists some query parameters, without any context or excluded scenarios.

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