radarr_search

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds the behavioral nuance that the search targets TMDB (an external source) rather than the local Radarr library. This is useful context not present in annotations, though it is not highly detailed.

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, focused sentence that immediately states the action and purpose. No filler or redundant phrases.

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 read-only search tool with two well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description is sufficient overall. The meaning of 'new movies' could be slightly ambiguous (new releases vs. not-yet-in-library), but this does not prevent correct use.

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 description coverage is 100%: both 'query' and 'limit' have clear descriptions. The tool description does not add extra parameter meaning beyond what the schema already provides, aligning with the baseline for full coverage.

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 it 'Search TMDB for new movies to add to Radarr', identifying the specific action (search), resource (TMDB), and intent (new movies to add). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like radarr_get_movies (listing existing movies) and radarr_trigger_search (triggering searches).

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 implies usage as a discovery step before adding movies to Radarr ('to add to Radarr'), providing clear context. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or define when-not-to-use, 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.