radarr_delete_movie_file

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It adds important value by explicitly warning that deletion is permanent, but omits other relevant traits such as required permissions, whether the file is removed from the Radarr database too, and whether the operation is reversible or requires confirmation.

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?

Two short sentences with zero waste. The core action is front-loaded and the warning follows immediately, maximizing signal density.

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 one-parameter destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and permanence warning. However, it does not mention prerequisites, side effects on the movie library, or expected outcome, so it is only minimally complete without annotations to fill those gaps.

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 is one parameter with full schema description coverage ('Movie file ID'), so the schema already carries the parameter semantics. The description adds no syntax, format, or sourcing guidance beyond what the schema provides; a baseline 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Delete a movie file') and adds the crucial scope qualifier 'from disk', which distinguishes it from sibling radarr_delete_movie (which removes the movie record, not the file). An agent can select this without opening the schema.

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 when-to-use, when-not, or alternative guidance is provided. The description implies the tool deletes a file, but gives no context about when this is appropriate versus deleting the movie entry or rescanning, leaving an agent to infer from the name alone.

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