overseerr_get_available_libraries

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

No annotations are provided, and the description does not explicitly state behavioral traits such as read-only safety, authentication requirements, or rate limits. The verb 'Get' implies a read operation, but the description fails to add clarity beyond that, leaving the agent to assume no side effects.

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, front-loaded sentence that contains no fluff. It precisely states the action and the data returned, earning its place without redundancy.

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 tool with no parameters and no output schema, the description provides adequate context by naming the data returned (server IDs and names). However, it does not specify the return structure (e.g., array of objects) or handle edge cases like no configured libraries, leaving slight ambiguity. Given the simplicity, this is mostly 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 tool has zero parameters, which sets the baseline at 4. The description adds no parameter info (there are none to add), but it does clarify the output content (IDs and names), indirectly explaining what the tool returns without input. This aligns with the baseline for a parameterless tool.

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 a specific verb ('Get') and clearly identifies the resource (configured Sonarr/Radarr server IDs and names). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on library configuration retrieval, which is unique among the listed tools.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention prerequisites or scenarios (e.g., 'before making a request, get library IDs'). It simply states what it does without contextualizing its usage.

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