list_livetv_dvrs

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the description is not required to restate those. It adds the GET endpoint as a small behavioral signal, but there is no extra context about pagination, required auth, or what the returned list represents.

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 compact and front-loaded: it states the operation and endpoint before the parameter list. There is no filler, and each section serves a purpose.

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 list with two optional filters and an output schema, the description is nearly sufficient. It doesn't explain the resource concept or when to choose this over the many sibling list/get endpoints, which leaves a meaningful gap for an agent choosing among alternatives.

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 descriptions are absent, so the description compensates with one-line meanings for uuid and lineup. The meanings are minimal, with lineup merely restating the parameter name and not clarifying acceptable values or formats.

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 says 'Get DVRs' and includes GET /livetv/dvrs, which names the exact resource and HTTP verb. It doesn't explicitly contrast with related siblings like get_livetv_dvrs_by_dvr_id or list_livetv_sessions, so it isn't maximally differentiating.

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 when-not-to-use guidance is given. An agent has to infer from the name and endpoint that this lists DVR resources, and there is no mention that get_livetv_dvrs_by_dvr_id retrieves a single DVR or that list_livetv_recordings/sessions are different resources.

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