radarr_update_notification

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, so the write nature is known. The description adds 'WRITE: this modifies your Radarr instance,' which reinforces mutation but does not expose additional behavioral details like permission requirements or side effects beyond the basic write.

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 brief and front-loaded, with only one necessary sentence plus a warning. It is efficiently sized, but the lack of parameter or usage information makes it feel under-specified rather than appropriately concise.

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?

With an output schema present, return-value details are not needed. However, the description omits key context such as what body contains, what force_save does, and when this tool should be used. It is incomplete for a mutation tool with three parameters.

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 provides no explanation of the parameters (id, body, force_save). The body object and force_save semantics are entirely undocumented, leaving the agent without critical context on how to construct valid inputs.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Update notification providers.' This clearly identifies the tool's action and target, distinguishing it from sibling tools like create, delete, get, and list notification. It does not include extra scope details, but it 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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create_notification or delete_notification. The description only states the action, leaving the agent to infer usage context. No exclusions or prerequisites are mentioned.

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