seerr_list_settings_sonarr

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already marks this as safe read operation, and the description ('Get') is consistent with that. However, the description adds no extra behavioral context (e.g., what settings are returned or any side effects). Given the annotation, the lack of extra info is acceptable, but not enriching.

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?

Single, concise sentence 'Get Sonarr settings' with no fluff. Front-loaded and easy to parse. Every word earns its place.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (no parameters, read-only annotation, output schema present), the description is sufficient. It doesn't explain return values, but the output schema covers that. A slightly richer description could mention what kind of Sonarr settings (e.g., server info, quality profiles), but this is a minor gap.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the schema is trivially fully covered. The description doesn't need to explain parameters. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and nothing is lacking.

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 Sonarr settings' uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('Sonarr settings'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like seerr_list_settings_radarr or seerr_create_settings_sonarr. It is immediately understood.

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 about when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as seerr_get_service_sonarr or seerr_list_settings_sonarr variants. The name implies it, but the description itself does not state a preferred use case or exclusions.

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