Retrieve Sonarr series information by TVDB ID when the Sonarr series ID is unknown.
Get series information by TVDB ID. Useful when you know the TVDB ID but not the Sonarr ID.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tvdbId | Yes | TVDB ID (e.g., 81189 for Breaking Bad) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not state whether this is a read-only operation (though 'Get' implies it), nor does it describe error behavior when the TVDB ID is not found, pagination, or return format. For a lookup tool with no annotations and no output schema, this is a significant gap.
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 sentences, zero waste, and the primary purpose is front-loaded ahead of the usage guidance. 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?
For a simple single-parameter lookup tool, the description covers the core purpose and a key usage condition. However, with no annotations and no output schema, it should ideally disclose whether the operation is read-only and what happens on failure. The omission of these behavioral details leaves it minimally adequate rather than complete.
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 100%, and the parameter schema already includes a description with an example ('TVDB ID (e.g., 81189 for Breaking Bad)'). The tool description adds no syntactic or format details beyond what the schema provides, so 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?
The description states a specific verb (Get) and resource (series information) with an explicit lookup key (TVDB ID). It distinguishes itself from sonarr_get_series, which presumably uses the Sonarr ID, by naming the identifier type in the lookup.
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?
It clearly states when to use this tool: 'when you know the TVDB ID but not the Sonarr ID.' This gives a concrete context and implicitly contrasts with siblings like sonarr_get_series that require Sonarr ID. It does not explicitly name the alternative tool or cover exclusion cases, so it falls short of a 5.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.