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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explicitly discloses timezone behavior ('hora local del cine', 'nunca UTC') and the cinema operating-day convention ('un pase de madrugada pertenece a la noche anterior'). This is exactly the kind of non-obvious behavior an agent needs to know.

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, information-dense sentence that front-loads the core action and result, then adds the critical timezone and operating-day caveats. Every clause earns its place; there is no repetition of schema content or filler.

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 lookup tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it states what is returned (full movie record, showtimes, purchase URLs), the matching semantics, and the two behavioral caveats (local time, operating day). An agent has everything needed to invoke it correctly.

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 100% and the only parameter is 'titulo', which the schema already describes as 'Título o parte del título'. The description adds meaningful context by specifying that the title can be the original title and that partial matches are accepted, which goes beyond the schema's brief description.

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 specific verb ('Busca'), a resource ('una película'), and the matching behavior ('por su título', 'acepta el título original y coincidencias parciales'). It also clearly distinguishes the tool from siblings like 'cartelera' and 'cines' by specifying that it returns the full movie record plus all showtimes and purchase URLs.

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 implies when to use this tool: when you need a movie's full details and its showtimes/purchase links by title. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusion conditions, but the sibling names ('cartelera', 'cines') and the description's focus on title-based lookup make the usage context clear.

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