radarr_get_profiles

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

The description says 'Get', which is consistent with the readOnlyHint and destructiveHint annotations. However, it adds no additional behavioral context beyond what annotations already provide, such as return format, rate limits, or prerequisites. With annotations covering the safety profile, this is acceptable but not enriched.

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, front-loaded with the main action and resource, and includes a useful parenthetical about usage. Every word earns its place; there is no fluff.

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 simplicity (no parameters, no output schema) and strong annotations, the description fully covers what the tool does and when to use it. It explains the returned items (quality profiles and root folders) and the prerequisite context for adding movies.

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 has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description doesn't need to explain any parameter details. It correctly focuses on the output and purpose.

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 function with a specific verb and resource: 'Get Radarr quality profiles and root folders'. It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'sonarr_get_profiles' by explicitly naming Radarr, and adds context by noting it's needed before adding movies.

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 provides clear context for when to use the tool: 'needed before adding movies'. This implies the appropriate usage time without explicitly naming alternatives or exclusions. While it doesn't say 'use this instead of X', the context is clear and actionable.

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