sonarr_trigger_backup

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It only states the action without revealing whether the backup runs synchronously, overwrites existing backups, requires specific permissions, or returns a status identifier. This is a significant transparency gap for a mutation-like operation.

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, clear sentence that directly communicates the tool's purpose without any unnecessary filler. Every word contributes meaning.

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 the tool's simplicity (zero parameters, no output schema), the description covers the core purpose adequately. However, it lacks any note about asynchronous behavior or how to verify the backup's success, which would make it fully context-rich. Still, for such a simple trigger, it remains mostly 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?

The tool has zero parameters, and the schema is an empty object. With no parameters to explain, the description naturally adds no parameter-specific semantics. The baseline of 4 for zero parameters is appropriate.

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 uses a specific verb ('Create') and clearly identifies the resource (an on-demand backup of Sonarr configuration and database). It distinguishes from sibling trigger tools (e.g., RSS sync, cutoff search, rescan) by uniquely targeting backup creation.

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 'on-demand' implies use when an immediate manual backup is desired, giving some usage context. However, there is no explicit guidance about when not to use it or alternatives, and it doesn't compare to other trigger commands, leaving some ambiguity.

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