sonarr_update_customformat

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description adds 'WRITE: this modifies your Sonarr instance,' which reinforces the write nature but doesn't disclose additional behavioral traits like partial vs. full update semantics, required permissions, or response behavior. Given the annotation coverage, this is adequate but not rich.

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 very brief—two sentences with no filler. It front-loads the purpose and adds a warning. However, the first sentence is essentially a restatement of the tool name, which could have been replaced with more specific 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?

For an update tool with an open-ended 'body' parameter and no schema descriptions, this description is incomplete. It doesn't specify the expected structure of the body, whether the update is partial or full, or how the 'id' is used. The presence of an output schema doesn't mitigate the lack of request-side documentation.

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, with only 'id' and an open-ended 'body' object. The description provides no explanation of what these parameters mean, what 'body' should contain, or how to construct an update. With such low schema coverage, the description fails to compensate, leaving the agent without necessary parameter semantics.

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 'Update custom formats,' giving a specific verb and resource. However, it doesn't distinguish this single update tool from the sibling 'sonarr_bulk_update_customformat' tool, and the plural 'formats' slightly conflicts with the singular tool name.

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?

No usage guidance is provided. The description doesn't explain when to use this tool versus the bulk update or other update tools, nor any exclusions or prerequisites.

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