sonarr_list_notification_schema

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, and the description is consistent with that. The description adds little beyond the annotation, only noting that it returns available fields/options. No extra behavioral context (e.g., side effects, rate limits) is provided, which is acceptable given the simple read-only nature.

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, 8 words, with no redundancy. It front-loads the primary purpose and provides a clarifying parenthetical without unnecessary detail.

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 tool has an output schema (which details the return structure) and zero parameters, the description is sufficient for basic understanding. It could mention that it returns the schema for all notification providers, but that is mostly implied by the plural 'providers'. Overall, it is complete for a simple schema-fetching tool.

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?

There are zero parameters, so baseline is 4. The description mentions 'available fields/options' which gives a hint about what the schema contains, but does not need to elaborate further since no parameters exist.

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 verb 'Return' and the resource 'notification providers schema', with the parenthetical 'available fields/options' clarifying what the schema contains. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like sonarr_list_notification (which lists notifications) and other *schema tools by specifying 'notification'.

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 retrieving the notification provider schema, but does not explicitly state when to use it over alternatives or provide exclusions. No alternative tools are mentioned, though the name and context make the purpose fairly self-evident.

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