arr_search_all

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states a read-like operation ('search') but omits details on result format, pagination, rate limits, or whether it queries all services simultaneously. Not sufficient for a high-stakes agent decision.

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?

A single sentence that is direct and to the point, with no redundant information.

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 simple search tool with one parameter, the description covers the basic purpose but lacks details like which *arr services are included, output format, or limitations (e.g., maximum results). The context signals indicate no output schema, increasing the burden on the description.

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 coverage is 100% with a single 'term' parameter described as 'Search term'. The description adds no extra nuance (e.g., case sensitivity, wildcard support). Baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Search' and the resource 'all configured *arr services' for 'any media', which distinguishes it from service-specific search tools like lidarr_search or radarr_search.

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 aggregate search versus the many sibling search tools (e.g., lidarr_search, radarr_search, sonarr_search, or the generic 'search' tool). The agent is left to infer from the name.

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