sonarr_lookup_series

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already communicates safety, and the description adds that it returns 'metadata candidates from TVDB,' which explains the output type. It does not describe pagination, result limits, or error behavior, but given the annotation coverage, this is adequate.

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?

One sentence, no fluff, front-loaded with the verb and resource. Every word earns its place, and the parenthetical '(term)' efficiently links the parameter to the concept.

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 read-only lookup with one parameter and an output schema, the description fully covers what the tool does and roughly what it returns. The low complexity means no additional details are necessary for competent use.

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 schema has 0% description coverage and only a 'term' parameter with a default. The description explicitly equates 'term' with 'title,' providing essential meaning that the schema lacks. This compensates well for the missing schema descriptions, though it could add details like matching behavior.

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 ('Search for a series by title'), the resource ('series'), and the source ('from TVDB'), which distinguishes it from library listing tools like sonarr_list_series. It is specific and immediately understandable.

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: search by title when you need metadata candidates from TVDB. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or name alternatives (e.g., sonarr_list_series for library series). The TVDB mention gives a hint but lacks explicit guidance.

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