grab_queue_item

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It conveys the action's intent but does not disclose side effects such as whether it triggers an asynchronous Sonarr command, whether it can fail if the item is not actually stuck, or whether the item is removed from the queue after import.

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 one focused sentence with the operative verb and condition front-loaded. Every phrase earns its place, and there is no 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?

For a single-parameter action with no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the core need: what the tool does and when it should be used. It is less complete on side effects and alternative routing, but the low complexity makes this a minor gap.

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 documents the single `id` parameter at 100% coverage with 'Queue item id'. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond restating that the target is a queue item, so the schema-driven baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 ('Force Sonarr to import') and names the exact resource ('a queue item') plus the triggering condition ('stuck pending or waiting on manual interaction'). This clearly differentiates it from queue read and removal tools like get_queue, remove_queue_item, and get_queue_details.

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 clearly states when to use the tool: when a queue item is stuck pending or waiting on manual interaction. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, such as using grab_queue_items for multiple items or remove_queue_item for deletion.

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