sonarr_create_downloadclient_testall

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

The 'WRITE: this modifies your Sonarr instance' note adds no information beyond the annotation readOnlyHint=false. It doesn't disclose what specifically gets modified, side effects, or consistency with the destructiveHint=false annotation.

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 very short (two sentences), but the first sentence is a tautology of the tool name and the second sentence restates the annotation. It is compact but fails to provide meaningful content, so it doesn't earn 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 unclear term 'testall' and the existence of many sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what the tool tests, what the output represents, or when to use it, even though it has an output schema.

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 no parameters, and the input schema is empty, so the description is not required to explain parameter behavior. Baseline for zero parameters is 4, and the description adds nothing harmful or missing.

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 'Create downloadclient testall' merely restates the tool name without explaining what 'testall' means or what action it performs. It does not specify that it tests all download clients or distinguish it from related tools like sonarr_create_downloadclient_test.

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 versus alternatives such as sonarr_create_downloadclient_test or other testall endpoints. The description lacks any context about the intended 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.