tautulli_library_stats

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

No annotations provided. The description only implies a read operation but lacks details on performance, side effects, or any constraints. For a tool with no annotations, the description should provide more behavioral context.

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, and front-loaded sentence. Every part contributes to understanding the tool's purpose without redundancy.

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 zero parameters and the presence of an output schema, the description is largely sufficient. It clearly states what the tool returns. However, it could mention that it covers all libraries on the server to avoid ambiguity.

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?

There are zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description adds value by listing the types of statistics returned (item counts, total plays, last played content), compensating for the lack of parameters.

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 action (Get), the resource (library-level statistics), and specifies the exact statistics returned (item counts, total plays, last played content). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like tautulli_user_stats or tautulli_most_watched.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives such as tautulli_user_stats or tautulli_most_watched. The description only states what it does without any context on scoping or exclusions.

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