stremio_trakt_sync

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

With no annotations, the description carries full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses the side effect of opening a browser auth page and the required second invocation, but says nothing about state on repeat calls (addon already configured), what sync overwrites, permission requirements, or failure modes when the user does not authorize.

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?

Two short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and then the critical sequencing caveat. No filler, every sentence earns its place.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described. For a two-step auth-and-install flow the description covers the essential sequence, but omits idempotency/overwrite behavior that an agent would want before re-running.

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?

One parameter (open_auth) at 0% schema description coverage. The description implies the browser page opens on the first call, which loosely maps to open_auth=true, but never explains the parameter or what open_auth=false does, so it only partially compensates for the coverage gap.

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?

States a specific action pair (link Trakt account, then install/refresh the Trakt addon), which clearly distinguishes it from generic addon siblings like stremio_install_addon or sync_addon. It does not explicitly name those siblings as alternatives, so it falls short of a 5.

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?

Gives explicit sequencing guidance: the first call opens the authorization page, and after authorizing the user must run the tool again. That is real when-to-use instruction. It lacks any when-not-to-use or alternatives for users who only want to install a non-Trakt addon.

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