sonarr_get_queue

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

Annotations already declare the operation read-only and non-destructive. The description adds the temporal qualifier 'current' (i.e., live snapshot rather than historical), but otherwise provides no additional behavioral detail such as result ordering or queue item composition. No contradiction exists.

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 entire description is one short, front-loaded sentence. Every word contributes to identifying the tool's purpose; there is no filler or redundant detail.

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 low complexity (one optional parameter, no output schema) and strong annotation coverage, this description is sufficient to understand what the tool returns at a high level. It doesn't explain queue item fields, but that is not required since no output schema exists and the tool is a simple read-only fetch.

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 single parameter 'limit' is fully described in the schema (including default), so description needs little added parameter context. With 100% schema coverage, baseline 3 is appropriate; description adds no extra parameter semantics.

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 uses the specific verb 'Get' and identifies the exact resource ('current Sonarr download queue'), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like radarr_get_queue or sonarr_get_series.

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 when-to-use or alternative guidance is provided. It doesn't mention that Radarr has its own queue tool or when a queue view is preferred over search/missing tools. Context must be inferred entirely from the tool name and siblings.

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