request_media

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses auto-confirm logic, validation, dry run, and TV seasons behavior. Missing details are what happens after a request is made (e.g., submission status).

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 concise, uses newlines for structure, and every sentence provides essential information. It is front-loaded with the core behavior.

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 11 parameters and no output schema, the description covers key invocation details: auto-confirm, seasons, validation. Missing are clarifications for some params like serverId, profileId, rootFolder, and the output format.

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 high (73%). The description adds significant context beyond schema, especially the auto-confirm rule and seasons interpretation. This goes beyond the baseline of 3.

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's action ('request media'), the resource, and the key auto-confirm behavior for TV ≤24 episodes. It distinguishes from siblings like search_media and manage_media_requests by specifying single/batch and validation details.

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?

Explicit guidance is provided on when auto-confirm applies (movies and TV ≤24 eps) and when confirmed:true is needed (TV >24 eps). Seasons handling is clearly explained. However, no explicit alternatives or when-not-to-use scenarios are given.

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