radarr_get_calendar

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safe-read nature is covered. The description adds no additional behavioral context such as date-range behavior, return format, or any side effects. It simply restates the purpose without enriching the agent's understanding beyond the 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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the main purpose. It is appropriately concise with no filler or redundant wording, making it easy to parse quickly.

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 tool is a simple read-only calendar listing with good schema coverage and safe annotations. However, with no output schema, the description could clarify what the response contains (e.g., list of movies with dates). It also relies on the schema for date default behavior, leaving some gaps. Overall, it is adequate but not fully 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?

The input schema provides 100% parameter coverage with descriptions for limit, startDate, and endDate, including defaults. The description adds no extra parameter semantics, but since the schema is complete, a baseline score of 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 'Get upcoming movies from the Radarr calendar' clearly states a specific verb (get), resource (Radarr calendar), and scope (upcoming movies). It differentiates from siblings like radarr_get_movies (which likely lists all movies) and sonarr_get_calendar (for TV series), though it doesn't explicitly name alternatives.

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. There are no explicit contexts, exclusions, or alternative tool mentions. The description is purely declarative and offers no conditional advice.

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