create_webhooks_sonarr

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

Annotations already declare the tool is non-destructive and idempotent. The description adds useful behavioral context by specifying the HTTP method and path (POST /api/webhooks/sonarr) and the effect of the webhook (triggering a subtitle search). This goes beyond the annotations without contradicting them.

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 extremely concise: a one-sentence purpose followed by the endpoint. Every word earns its place, and the key action is front-loaded. No unnecessary filler or repetition.

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 there are no parameters and annotations cover safety, the description is mostly adequate. However, it does not explain what the webhook payload should contain or what the output represents, even though an output schema exists. It also leaves the create-vs-receive ambiguity unresolved, which could confuse an agent about how to invoke the tool.

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 has zero parameters, so the description correctly has nothing to add. Baseline is 4 for tools with no parameters, and no additional explanation is needed.

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 states a specific action: searching for missing subtitles, triggered by Sonarr webhooks, and provides the HTTP endpoint. It distinguishes from siblings like create_webhooks_plex and create_webhooks_radarr by explicitly naming Sonarr. However, it is slightly ambiguous whether the tool creates a webhook registration or handles an incoming webhook, which is a minor clarity gap.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like create_webhooks_plex or create_webhooks_radarr. The differentiation is implied only by the name and the 'Sonarr' reference, but the description does not state conditions like 'use this for Sonarr webhook integration' or mention any exclusions.

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