tdarr_scan_files

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions running scans but does not state side effects (e.g., whether scans are non-destructive), permissions, or output behavior. The description is too brief for full transparency.

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 extremely concise, consisting of two short sentences. The first sentence states the primary action, and the second adds a critical parameter constraint. No unnecessary words.

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?

Given the tool's complexity (nested object parameter), lack of output schema, and many sibling tools, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return values, how to specify which scan type, prerequisites, or whether scanning is blocking.

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 schema only describes 'scanConfig' as 'Scan configuration object', which is vague. The description adds semantic value by specifying that scanFresh and scanFindNew require a single string dbID inside scanConfig, aiding parameter usage beyond the schema.

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 tool's purpose: running one of three specific scan types (scanFresh, scanFindNew, scanFolderWatcher) on a library. It uses specific verbs and resource names, distinguishing it from siblings like tdarr_rescan_file and tdarr_scan_individual_file.

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 description only provides a technical requirement (scanFresh/scanFindNew need a dbID) but no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like tdarr_rescan_file or tdarr_scan_individual_file. It lacks explicit context for selection.

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