sonarr_grab_queue_bulk

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

The description explicitly labels the operation as 'WRITE' and notes that it modifies the Sonarr instance, aligning with the readOnlyHint=false annotation. It adds the behavioral nuance of immediate action ('now'). However, it does not disclose potential side effects like triggering downloads or irreversibility, so it provides only moderate context beyond the annotations.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and then adding a clear write warning. Every word earns its place, with no fluff or redundancy.

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 simple bulk operation with one parameter and an output schema, the description covers the essential action and input. However, it lacks broader context such as how to obtain queue IDs, whether this is a forced grab, and differentiation from the singular sibling tool. The absence of a return-value explanation is acceptable due to the 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 input schema is minimal (one 'body' property with no description, type object, default {}), and schema description coverage is 0%. The description compensates by clarifying that the body should be a list of IDs, which is essential for using the tool correctly. However, it leaves minor ambiguity about the exact structure (e.g., array vs object, ID types).

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 clearly states the action ('Grab multiple queued items now') and the resource ('queued items'). It specifies the bulk nature ('multiple') which distinguishes it from the sibling tool sonarr_grab_queue_item, and the input format ('body is a list of ids'). This gives a precise, unambiguous 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?

The description implies usage for grabbing multiple queued items at once, but it does not explicitly mention when to use this tool versus alternatives like sonarr_grab_queue_item. The 'multiple' keyword provides implicit context, but there are no explicit exclusions or alternative tool references.

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