sonarr_list_downloadclient_schema

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already signals read-only behavior, and the description's 'Return' aligns with that. The added phrase 'available fields/options' is essentially synonymous with 'schema,' offering minimal extra behavioral context. No contradiction exists.

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?

A single sentence with a clear verb and object, no filler. It is front-loaded and efficiently conveys the tool's purpose without 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 zero-parameter schema-listing operation with an output schema available, the description is sufficient. It states exactly what is returned (schema/fields/options) and the read-only annotation covers safety, so no further elaboration is needed.

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 accepts zero parameters, so there are no parameter semantics to clarify. Per baseline for zero-param tools, a score of 4 is appropriate; the description does not need to explain parameter details.

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?

Description clearly states the tool returns the download clients schema, with a parenthetical clarifying it provides available fields/options. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_downloadclient, which lists actual download client instances rather than their schema.

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 purpose is self-evident, implying use when schema/fields for download clients are needed. However, the description provides no explicit guidance on when to choose this over other schema tools or list_downloadclient, and no exclusions or alternatives are mentioned.

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