get_series

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the content shape (disk vs aired counts, monitored seasons, size), but that largely overlaps with the output schema that already exists, and no further behavioral traits (auth, caching, cost) are disclosed.

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?

Front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a compact field list and two short illustrative examples. Every sentence earns its place, though the examples slightly pad the text without adding new invocation 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 a single-parameter, read-only lookup with an output schema, the description is complete enough: it explains scope and the main content returned. Only minor gaps remain around what happens with an unknown/ambiguous title.

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?

Schema description coverage is 100% and the single 'series' parameter already documents that it accepts an ID or title with an example. The description adds no additional semantics beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 verb and resource ('Details of one series in Sonarr') and enumerates what is returned (per-season stats, monitored seasons, size). It is clearly distinct from siblings like get_episodes or search_library, though it never explicitly names an alternative to disambiguate.

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 two example questions ('How complete is The Capture?', 'Which seasons of Severance are monitored?') imply when the tool is useful, giving reasonable context. However, there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance or routing to sibling tools such as get_episodes for episode-level data.

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