seerr_delete_settings_sonarr

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false. The description's 'DESTRUCTIVE: this deletes data' largely repeats the annotation without adding new behavioral context such as irreversibility, effects on related data, or authorization needs. It does specify 'Sonarr instance', but that is already in the tool name, so minimal additional value.

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 just two short sentences with the main purpose front-loaded. Every word earns its place; there is no redundancy or unnecessary detail. It is appropriately concise for a simple delete operation.

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?

Although the tool is simple with one parameter and has an output schema, the description omits parameter semantics and any usage prerequisites. For example, it doesn't suggest listing Sonarr instances first via seerr_list_settings_sonarr. The annotations and output schema do not fill these gaps, leaving the description minimally complete for reliable agent invocation.

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 has 0% description coverage for sonarr_id, and the description does not explain what the ID represents or how to find it. The parameter name offers a hint, but with low schema coverage the description must compensate, and it does not. The agent may not know which ID to pass.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Delete Sonarr instance'. This clearly distinguishes the tool from sibling tools like seerr_create_settings_sonarr, seerr_update_settings_sonarr, and seerr_list_settings_sonarr. The 'DESTRUCTIVE' warning reinforces the purpose.

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. It does not mention that deletion is irreversible, that it should be used only after listing instances, or that updating should be done via seerr_update_settings_sonarr instead. The agent must infer usage solely from the name.

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