sonarr_get_health

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

The description adds no behavioral information beyond the annotations. The readOnlyHint annotation already indicates safety, and 'List health' merely restates that, without disclosing what health data is returned, whether it includes critical issues, or any operational side effects. No contradiction exists, but no extra value is added.

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 a single, compact phrase with zero wasted words. It is perfectly concise and front-loaded, satisfying the requirement that every sentence 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?

For a parameterless read-only tool with an output schema, the description is minimal but adequate for basic identification. However, it doesn't explain what 'health' means in the Sonarr context or guide selection against system status tools, so it leaves room for ambiguity.

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?

With zero parameters, the schema is fully self-explanatory. There is no parameter semantic burden on the description. The baseline for 0 params is 4, and the description doesn't need to add anything.

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 ('List') and resource ('health'), clearly indicating it retrieves health information. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like sonarr_get_system_status and sonarr_ping by naming 'health' as a distinct resource, though it doesn't elaborate on what that includes.

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. There is no mention of use cases, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer that 'List health' is the appropriate choice for health checks without any supporting context.

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