sonarr_get_custom_format

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full transparency burden. It does disclose that the return includes 'full specification details,' but it doesn't explicitly state it's a read-only operation, describe error behavior, or mention any permissions needed. For a simple get tool, this is adequate but not rich.

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, front-loaded sentence with no fluff. It clearly states the action, the target, and the scope in minimal 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?

For a single-parameter get tool with no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It indicates what is returned ('full specification details') and references the ID source in the schema. It could add error handling details or explicitly confirm non-mutation, but given the simplicity, it's reasonably comprehensive.

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 100%; the schema's description of formatId is clear ('Custom format ID (from sonarr_list_custom_formats)'). The tool description itself adds no additional parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so it meets the baseline for high coverage.

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 gets a single custom format by ID, with a specific verb (Get) and resource (custom format by ID). It also distinguishes from the sibling list tool by indicating it's for a single item rather than listing all.

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 'by ID' gives clear context for when to use this tool (when you have a specific format ID). However, it doesn't explicitly mention alternatives or when-not-to-use, so it falls short of a 5.

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