list_delay_profiles

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral burden. It goes beyond a tautology by explaining that delay profiles are organized per protocol and tag and that they govern the wait for a better release. It does not discuss response shape or side effects, but 'List' strongly implies a read-only operation.

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 a single well-structured sentence with no filler. It front-loads the operation ('List delay profiles') and then adds a concise clarifying clause that earns its place.

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 zero-parameter list operation with no output schema and no annotations, the description is adequately complete. It explains the core meaning of delay profiles and implies no side effects, though it does not explicitly state that the call is safe or non-mutating.

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 there is no parameter-semantics burden for the description to carry. The 'per protocol and tag' detail adds useful context about the returned data, which is more than necessary for a parameterless call.

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 and resource: 'List delay profiles'. It then explains what a delay profile is — how long Sonarr waits for a better release before grabbing — which clearly distinguishes it from siblings like list_quality_profiles and list_release_profiles.

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 implies when this tool is relevant by defining the domain concept, but it does not explicitly state when to prefer it over related profile-listing tools or provide exclusions. An agent can infer usage from the explanation, but explicit guidance is absent.

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