seerr_blocklist

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It explicitly labels write operations as 'modifies your Seerr instance' and destructive operations as 'deletes data', which is key behavioral context beyond the basic operation listing. However, it does not mention auth requirements or potential side effects beyond modification/deletion.

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 well-structured: a single introductory sentence explaining the dispatcher nature, followed by a compact bullet list where each operation has a signature and a brief note. Every line adds value, and there is no redundant prose.

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?

The description covers all six operations and their parameters, which is essential for a dispatcher tool with a generic arguments schema. The presence of an output schema means return values need not be explained. However, it lacks an explicit example of how to build the arguments dict, and the behavior of each operation beyond the write/destructive labels is minimal.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by listing each operation's parameters and defaults (e.g., tmdb_id, media_type, take, skip, search, filter). Parameter names are self-explanatory, but the description does not explain value formats or provide an example of the arguments dict structure, leaving some ambiguity.

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 this tool handles Seerr blocklist operations and enumerates all six specific operations with distinct verbs (create, delete, get, list) and resources (media, collection). This distinguishes it from sibling tools focused on other Seerr domains.

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 usage context is implied by the blocklist operation list, but there are no explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use instructions. The description does provide how-to guidance (pass operation and arguments dict), but not when to choose this tool over sibling tools.

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