sonarr_get_quality_profiles

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. 'Get all' reasonably implies a full, unpaginated read with no side effects, but it does not state whether results are cached, whether any auth is required, or what the shape of a profile is. Adequate but thin for an unannotated tool.

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, no filler, with the action front-loaded in the first sentence and the purpose in the second. Every sentence 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?

With zero parameters, no output schema, and a simple read operation, the description is nearly complete. Only the return-value shape is left unspecified, which is a minor gap for a tool whose output structure an agent would benefit from knowing.

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 tool takes zero parameters, so the baseline of 4 applies; there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. No parameter-related information is missing.

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: 'Get all quality profiles', with a second sentence clarifying what the returned profiles represent ('quality settings you can use when adding series'). It is clearly distinguishable from sibling profile-listing tools like get_language_profiles, though it never explicitly names that sibling.

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 phrase 'you can use when adding series' implies the usage context (retrieve profiles before calling add_series), but it never states when not to use it or names an alternative. Usage is implied rather than directed.

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