tdarr_remove_video_codec_exclude

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It states 'remove' but does not disclose side effects, required permissions, what happens if the codec is not in the list, or any other behavioral traits. The description is minimal and does not compensate for missing annotations.

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 sentence of 16 words, efficient and to the point. No unnecessary content. Structure is not needed for such a short description.

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?

The description lacks complete context for this simple tool. It does not mention return values, error conditions, or any limitations. With no output schema, the description should provide more detail on what happens after successful removal or on failure.

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 input schema covers 100% of parameters with descriptions (ele and dbID). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema—it merely restates the action. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate as schema already documents 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 (remove), the resource (video codec), and the context (excluded/included list in basic video transcoding settings). The verb and resource are specific, and it distinguishes from sibling tools like add/update. However, the phrase 'excluded/included' is slightly ambiguous as to which list is affected.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to remove vs update, or prerequisites like the codec needing to be in the list). There is no mention of context or exclusions.

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