prowlarr_get_stats

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

With no annotations provided, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It indicates a read-only operation ('get') and specifies the nature of the data (queries, grabs, failures), making the tool's behavior mostly transparent. However, it does not mention potential risks, latency, or required permissions, which would enhance transparency.

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 a single, concise sentence that front-loads the key action and resource. Every word is essential, and there is no extraneous information. It is well-structured for quick comprehension.

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?

Given zero parameters and no output schema, the description is mostly complete: it tells what the tool does. However, it does not describe the return format or potential errors, which would make it fully complete. For a simple stats retrieval, this is largely sufficient.

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 input schema has zero parameters, so the description does not need to provide parameter semantics. According to the rubric, 0 parameters yields a baseline score of 4. No additional param info is needed.

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 it retrieves indexer statistics, specifying the exact data types (queries, grabs, failures). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like prowlarr_get_indexers (list of indexers) or prowlarr_search (search operation). The verb 'get' and resource 'statistics' are specific and unambiguous.

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 description implies usage when statistics about indexer performance are needed, but it does not explicitly state when not to use it or provide alternatives. For a simple, parameterless tool, the implied usage is adequate but lacks explicit guidance on context or restrictions.

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