radarr_update_config_metadata

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

The description explicitly states 'WRITE: this modifies your Radarr instance,' which adds context that this is a mutating operation. This is consistent with readOnlyHint=false and adds a small amount of behavioral context, but it largely repeats the annotation and does not disclose additional behaviors such as overwriting existing settings or requiring specific permissions.

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, with two short sentences that front-load the essential purpose. There is no wasted wording, but the brevity comes at the cost of missing details, which is acceptable for this dimension but not for others.

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 configuration update tool with nested body parameters, the description is severely incomplete. It does not explain prerequisites, the effect of updates, or how to structure the request. The presence of an output schema does not compensate for the lack of critical usage context.

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 schema description coverage at 0%, the description provides no explanation of the 'id' and 'body' parameters. It does not clarify what ID refers to or what structure the body object should have, leaving the agent without essential information for proper invocation.

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 ('Update') and the resource ('metadata providers'), which is specific and understandable. However, it does not differentiate this tool from the sibling 'radarr_update_metadata' which also updates metadata providers, so it lacks distinctive sibling differentiation.

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 like radarr_update_metadata or other configuration update tools. The description mentions only what the tool does, not the context in which it should be invoked or any exclusions.

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