request_media

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains that this tool submits a request, details the season auto-selection behavior, and discloses the return format. It lacks explicit mention of idempotency or permissions, but for this simple action it is adequately transparent.

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 well-structured with an intro, workflow note, season clarification, parameter list, and return value. Every sentence earns its place, with no redundancy or filler. It is efficient and easy to parse.

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?

The description is complete for a tool of this complexity: it covers purpose, prerequisites, parameter usage, and return format. Even though an output schema exists, the additional return description is useful. The season handling logic is clearly explained, making the tool fully understandable.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description fully compensates by explaining each parameter: tmdb_id's source, media_type's allowed values, and seasons' format with examples. It also clarifies the 'all' option and the auto-selection for single-season shows, adding meaning far beyond the raw schema.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: to request a movie or TV show be added to Plex. The specific verb 'Request' plus the resource 'movie or TV show' distinguishes it from sibling read-oriented tools like get_requests or search_media. The workflow hint to use search_media first reinforces its role.

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?

The description provides a clear prerequisite (use search_media first) and conditional guidance for TV shows with multiple seasons. While it does not explicitly list alternatives or when-not-to-use cases, the context of being the only request-creation tool among siblings makes the usage clear.

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