radarr_refresh_movie

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It only states the action but does not disclose what 'refresh' entails (e.g., what metadata is updated, side effects, duration, or error behavior). This is insufficient for an agent to understand the impact.

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 communicates the core function with no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded and efficient.

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 the lack of output schema and annotations, the description fails to provide context on expected results or behavior. It does not explain what the agent should expect after triggering a refresh (e.g., success response, if any) or error conditions (e.g., invalid movieId).

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 schema covers 100% of parameters with a description for movieId. The description adds no extra meaning beyond what's in the schema ('Movie ID to refresh'). Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema already does the work.

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 action ('trigger a metadata refresh') and the target ('a specific movie in Radarr'). The verb and resource are specific, and while it doesn't explicitly differentiate from siblings, the distinct resource (refresh vs search/get) makes the purpose clear.

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 guidelines are provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like radarr_search or radarr_get_movies. There is no mention of prerequisites (e.g., movie must exist in Radarr) or when a refresh is appropriate.

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