radarr_restore_backup_upload

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

The description adds 'WRITE: this modifies your Radarr instance,' which is consistent with readOnlyHint=false and clarifies the mutation. However, it does not disclose potential destructive effects (e.g., overwriting current settings) or post-restore behavior, and the 'limited support' caveat is vague. Annotations already cover the basic safety profile, so the added value is moderate.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the core action and resource, and includes a critical write warning. No filler or redundancy.

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 simple write operation with an output schema and annotations, the description covers the essential points: what it does, that it modifies the instance, and that it uses multipart upload. The 'limited support' phrase is a gap that could confuse, but overall it is adequate.

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?

With zero parameters in the schema, the baseline is 4. The description correctly mentions 'multipart upload,' which is essential for invoking the tool (the file is sent as multipart data, not JSON). It does not detail how the file should be specified, but this is a useful hint beyond the empty schema.

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 ('Restore Radarr') and the specific resource ('uploaded backup file'), distinguishing it from the sibling tool 'radarr_restore_backup' which likely uses server-side files. The verb is specific and the scope is unambiguous.

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 when to use this tool (for restoring from an uploaded backup) but does not explicitly contrast it with alternatives like 'radarr_restore_backup' or state when not to use it. The 'limited support' hint offers some context but lacks specifics.

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