radarr_history

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 discloses that the tool surfaces downloadId and performs client-side filtering, implying it is a read-only operation. However, it does not explicitly state safety (non-destructive) or any auth/rate limit concerns, leaving some ambiguity.

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 three sentences, each adding value: purpose, downloadId detail, and filtering behavior. It is front-loaded with the main action and efficient, with no wasted words.

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 no annotations and an output schema (not shown), the description covers parameter details and a key behavioral note (client-side filtering). It lacks information on ordering (e.g., most recent first) or pagination beyond limit, but overall is adequate for a history-listing tool.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description compensates fully. It explains the 'limit' parameter (default 20) and 'event_type' parameter with aliases (grabbed, imported, etc.) and notes client-side filtering, which adds critical meaning beyond the bare schema.

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's purpose: 'Show recent Radarr history events (grab/import/deletion...).' This specifies the verb (show), resource (Radarr history), and scope (recent events), distinguishing it from sibling tools like radarr_queue or sonarr_history.

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 does not explicitly guide when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., radarr_queue for current queue or sonarr_history for Sonarr). It only describes its own functionality without context on when-not or alternative tools.

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