get_indexer_by_id_newznab

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no behavioral context beyond restating 'Read' and the HTTP method; it does not disclose result format, pagination behavior, required indexer configuration, or any 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 terse and front-loaded with 'Read Newznab' followed by the endpoint. The repetitive 'Query parameter' list is long but not padded; it is functionally a parameter inventory, yet it does little to explain the tool and could have been grouped or summarized.

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 33 parameters, a single vague sentence and a bare parameter list are not enough for an agent to know how to call it correctly. An output schema exists, but the description still fails to convey what action the tool performs, which parameters are meaningful in which contexts, or what a successful call represents.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and 33 parameters, the description had to compensate by explaining parameter meaning, but it only lists names and labels each as 'Path parameter' or 'Query parameter.' This adds minimal structural information not in the schema, but gives no semantic meaning for fields like t, cat, extended, or configured, leaving an agent guessing at valid values and combinations.

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 verb and a target ('Read Newznab') and includes the endpoint path, so an agent can see it targets an indexer's Newznab endpoint. However, it never says what 'read Newznab' actually returns or does (e.g., search results from a configured Newznab indexer), leaving the purpose vague. It does not differentiate itself from siblings like get_indexer_by_id_download beyond the name itself.

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 such as get_indexer_by_id or get_indexer_by_id_download. The description gives no context, prerequisites, or exclusions, so an agent must infer from the tool name and endpoint.

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