radarr_push_release

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

The description adds the explicit warning 'WRITE: this modifies your Radarr instance,' which aligns with the readOnlyHint=false annotation and reinforces the mutation risk. However, it does not go beyond that to disclose additional behavioral traits such as idempotency, failure modes, or whether a release must already exist.

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 two concise sentences with the primary action front-loaded and a clear write warning. There is no redundant content or unnecessary background.

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?

For a tool that pushes a release to a download client, the description is too sparse. It omits input requirements, prerequisites, expected response behavior, and any guidance on how the body parameter should be structured, making it difficult for an agent to invoke correctly without external knowledge.

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 input schema contains a single generic 'body' object with additionalProperties=true and no description coverage. The description provides no information about what fields are needed (e.g., release ID, download client ID), leaving the agent without any guidance on how 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 clearly states the action ('Push'), the resource ('a release'), and the destination ('download client'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like search_releases and list_release. The explicit 'WRITE' marker also signals this is an action-oriented operation rather than a read-only query.

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 the tool should be used when you want to send a release to a download client, but it does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools such as grabbing from the queue or searching for releases. No when-not-to-use or prerequisite conditions are provided.

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