sonarr_update_quality_definitions

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

Annotations already mark readOnlyHint false and destructiveHint false. The description adds 'WRITE: this modifies your Sonarr instance,' which effectively restates the annotations without providing deeper behavioral context (e.g., effects, requirements, reversibility).

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, but the phrase 'Update qualitydefinition update' is awkward and redundant. While it is technically concise, it sacrifices clarity and substance.

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?

The description is skeletal for a write operation. It fails to explain what the body should contain, how the update is applied, or any expected output. With a 0% schema coverage, this leaves a critical knowledge gap.

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 only parameter 'body' is an array with no schema description and 0% coverage. The description does not mention parameters at all, leaving the agent with no clue what to pass in the body.

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 qualitydefinition' which indicates updating quality definitions in Sonarr, though the redundant 'update' makes it slightly awkward. It does not distinguish from the sibling sonarr_update_qualitydefinition, but the core purpose is evident.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The only extra note is 'WRITE: this modifies your Sonarr instance,' which is a warning, not usage direction.

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