seerr_get_request

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

The description adds no behavioral context beyond the readOnlyHint annotation. It doesn't mention error cases, response format, or the fact that the request_id likely references a specific media request. While consistent with the annotation, it offers no extra transparency.

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 extremely short, but it's under-specified rather than concise. It conveys no useful information beyond the tool name and lacks any elaboration that would justify its presence. It is not a model of conciseness.

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 with a single parameter and a getter operation, the description still fails to provide sufficient context. It does not explain what a MediaRequest is, how it relates to other request-related tools, or any expected outcomes. The presence of an output schema doesn't make the description complete.

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 does not explain the request_id parameter or its expected format. The description's only content is 'Get MediaRequest', which doesn't compensate for the missing parameter documentation. Even though the parameter name is self-descriptive, the description adds no value.

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 'Get MediaRequest' is essentially a restatement of the tool name 'seerr_get_request', providing no detail about what a MediaRequest is or how this differs from sibling tools like seerr_list_request or seerr_get_user_requests. It expresses a clear verb and resource but fails to add distinguishing information.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool relative to alternatives. The description provides no context on when a request_id is needed, how to obtain it, or why this getter should be preferred over list_request or other getters. This is a complete absence of usage guidance.

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