sonarr_get_import_lists

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not explicitly state that this is a read-only operation, nor does it mention any side effects, permissions, or limitations. The 'get' in the name hints at non-destructiveness, but the description itself provides no behavioral context beyond the listing action.

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 that conveys the essential information without waste. The examples of source types are useful and do not add unnecessary length. It is perfectly concise.

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 simple, parameterless list tool with no output schema, the description is largely complete. It states what the tool lists and gives examples. However, it does not describe the return structure (e.g., fields of the import list objects), but given the low complexity and lack of an output schema, this is a minor omission.

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 tool has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The schema coverage is 100% (vacuously true with no properties). The description adds no parameter information, but none is needed since there are no parameters to explain.

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 performs a 'List' operation on a specific resource ('configured import list sources') in Sonarr. It provides concrete examples (Trakt, IMDb, Plex Watchlist) that distinguish it from sibling tools like sonarr_get_quality_profiles or sonarr_get_health. The verb and resource are explicit and unambiguous.

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 implies usage (when you need to see configured import lists) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of related tools like sonarr_update_import_list or when not to use this getter. However, the purpose is clear enough that an agent can infer appropriate usage.

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