sonarr_get_naming

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It states the tool 'shows naming patterns' but does not disclose any behavioral traits such as performance, authentication requirements, or that it is read-only. The absence of explicit behavioral details limits 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 two short sentences that are front-loaded with core functionality. Every word earns its place; no redundant or extraneous content.

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 getter with no parameters and no output schema, the description adequately explains the tool's purpose. However, it lacks details about the specific naming patterns returned (e.g., file, folder, season), which could aid agents in understanding the output format.

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 no parameters, and schema description coverage is 100%. The description adds no parameter information because there are none to describe. For a zero-parameter tool, the baseline is 4.

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 tool retrieves file naming configuration from Sonarr for TV, specifying that it shows naming patterns for files and folders. This is a specific verb-resource pair and distinguishes it from siblings like radarr_get_naming (movies) or lidarr_get_naming (music).

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 Sonarr naming config is needed but does not provide explicit context on when to use or avoid alternatives. While siblings are for different arr apps, no direct guidance on exclusions or prerequisites is given.

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