arr_calendar

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It confirms the tool reads upcoming items, but says nothing about whether results are read-only, whether it requires configured services, how many entries are returned, or any rate/refresh constraints. For a no-annotation tool this is a significant gap.

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?

A single, front-loaded sentence with zero filler. The service-to-content mapping is delivered before anything else, and nothing is repeated from the title or schema.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. The description adequately covers the two optional parameters at a high level but omits any behavioral or prerequisite context, leaving it minimally viable rather than complete.

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 coverage is 0% and the schema declares no enums, so the description is doing real work by revealing that 'service' accepts sonarr or radarr. However, it leaves the 'days' parameter undescribed (only echoed as 'next days'), so half the parameters remain semantically thin.

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 states a specific resource (upcoming episodes or movie releases) and ties each to its backing service (sonarr/radarr), so an agent can tell it apart from siblings like arr_queue or arr_status. It is clear but stops short of explicitly positioning itself relative to those siblings.

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 phrase 'for the next days' implies a forward-looking calendar lookup, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance, no when-not condition, and no mention of any alternative tool such as arr_search or arr_queue. The agent must infer the use case entirely.

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