sonarr_list_delayprofile

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

The description 'List' aligns with the readOnlyHint annotation, so there is no contradiction. However, it adds no behavioral information beyond what the annotation already provides—such as whether the list is paginated, ordered, or filtered. With annotations present, the description fails to disclose any additional behavioral traits.

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, concise sentence with no filler or redundant information. Every word earned its place, and the structure is front-loaded with the verb 'List' to immediately convey the action.

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 zero-parameter list operation with an output schema present, the description is sufficiently complete. It clearly states what the tool does, and the absence of parameters means no additional inputs need explanation. The output schema provides the return structure, so the description doesn't need to elaborate.

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 and 100% schema coverage. The description adds nothing about parameters, but with no parameters to document, the baseline of 4 is appropriate as there is nothing else the description needs to clarify.

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 'List delay profiles' clearly identifies the verb (List) and the resource (delay profiles), making the tool's purpose unambiguous. While it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like sonarr_get_delayprofile, the naming convention of list vs get provides implicit distinction, but not as robust as an explicit scoping statement.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention any prerequisites, exclusions, or suggest when the sibling get_delayprofile might be more appropriate. The agent receives no contextual direction beyond the tool's name.

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