sabnzbd_get_queue

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

No annotations are present, so the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It merely states the action without any information about side effects, read-only nature, or other behavioral traits. The agent cannot infer safety or performance implications.

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 short sentence that efficiently states the purpose. It is not verbose, but for such a simple tool, it is adequately concise. However, it could be slightly more informative without losing conciseness.

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 tool has no output schema and no annotations, yet the description does not explain what the queue contains or the return format. For a retrieval operation, it should at least mention typical return fields (e.g., downloads, status). This lack of context leaves the agent underinformed.

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 has no parameters, and schema description coverage is 100% by default. The description adds no further parameter semantics, but the baseline score of 3 is appropriate since no parameters need elaboration.

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 'Get SABnzbd queue.' uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('SABnzbd queue'), clearly indicating the tool's action. Among sibling tools like radarr_get_queue and sonarr_get_queue, it distinguishes itself by the service name (SABnzbd).

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 guidance is provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as sabnzbd_pause, sabnzbd_resume, or other queue tools. The description does not mention prerequisites or usage context.

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