trash_list_profiles

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the transparency burden. The verbs 'List' and 'Shows' imply a read-only operation with no side effects. It adds meaningful context by referencing the TRaSH Guides source and the nature of the output (recommended profiles for use cases). However, it does not disclose whether the data is fetched live or static, or if any authentication is required.

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 two sentences of about 25 words total, with the main action front-loaded. The first sentence states exactly what the tool does, and the second sentence clarifies the output's purpose with examples. Every word earns its place.

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 list tool with no output schema, the description adequately covers what is listed and what the output represents. It provides enough context for an agent to invoke correctly. It could optionally mention how the returned profiles might be used with other tools (e.g., trash_get_profile), but that is not essential for correctness.

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 input schema already provides a description for the only parameter ('service') and an enum of valid values. The description's phrase 'for Radarr or Sonarr' reinforces the parameter without adding new syntax or format details. With 100% schema coverage, the baseline of 3 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 the specific verb 'List' with a clear resource ('TRaSH Guides quality profiles') and target ('Radarr or Sonarr'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like trash_get_profile (which likely gets a single profile) and sonarr_get_quality_profiles (which queries actual server profiles) by explicitly referencing TRaSH Guides.

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 conveys clear context for when to use the tool: to view recommended TRaSH Guide profiles for various use cases. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the context is unambiguous enough for an agent to select it over similar profile-related tools.

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