sonarr_update_downloadclient

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

The description adds a 'WRITE' warning, but this merely restates what the annotations already indicate (readOnlyHint=false). It does not disclose side effects, reversibility, or other behavioral nuances, providing no value beyond the annotations.

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 short and front-loaded with the purpose, but it is under-specified. The 'WRITE' warning is redundant given the annotations, and the text does not provide sufficient context for correct usage, making it less effective than its brevity suggests.

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?

Despite having an output schema, the description leaves critical gaps: parameter meanings, usage scenarios, and behavioral details are absent. For a tool with nested objects and no schema descriptions, this is inadequate for safe and correct invocation.

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 for its three parameters (id, body, force_save), and the description offers no explanation of their meanings or usage. It completely fails to compensate for the missing 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 the action: 'Update download clients' with the resource specified. It distinguishes from sibling tools like creation, deletion, or retrieval, though it lacks detail on specific fields or behavior.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The warning 'WRITE: this modifies your Sonarr instance' is more behavioral than usage-guidance, and no prerequisites or exclusions are mentioned.

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