radarr_search_movie

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses the key side effect ('This sends the movie to your download client'), which goes beyond the schema. However, it omits permissions, reversibility, rate limits, and what happens with multiple IDs, leaving significant behavioral gaps.

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?

Three short sentences are front-loaded with purpose, then side effect, then parameter sourcing. No wasted words, though the sentence about the download client could be more precisely integrated with the search action.

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 tool with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the basic action and side effect. It is still incomplete: it does not explain batch behavior, response format, or failure modes, and the singular/plural mismatch between description and schema could confuse an agent.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the schema already documents the single parameter as an array of movie IDs. The description adds only that IDs come from the library, but does not clarify array handling or formatting beyond what the schema provides. 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 ('Search') and resource ('movie') and clarifies the effect ('to download'). However, it does not distinguish itself from the sibling 'radarr_search_movies', and the description says 'a specific movie' while the schema accepts an array of movieIds, creating mild ambiguity.

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?

Offers only 'Use the movieId from your library', which is a parameter sourcing hint rather than guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives like radarr_search_movies or radarr_get_movie. No when-not conditions or alternative routing are provided.

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