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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, so the description focuses on what is returned: now-showing films with local showtimes, coming-soon films, streaming availability, and key metadata fields. It adds the site feature-gate constraint but does not describe pagination or ordering behavior.

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 three compact sentences: scope is front-loaded, followed by return categories and included fields. Every sentence contributes useful information without repetition 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?

With no output schema, the description appropriately explains the return composition and included fields. Combined with fully documented parameters and safety annotations, it is nearly complete, though it omits details like result ordering or pagination behavior beyond the limit parameter.

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%, so both parameters are already fully documented in the input schema. The description mentions the return categories that correspond loosely to the status enum but does not add syntax, defaults, or other meaning beyond what the schema provides.

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 and resource ('List movies') and clearly scopes it to a neighborhood and sites with movies_enabled. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings such as get_showtimes, though the catalog-focused framing is reasonably distinct.

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 site prerequisite ('only on sites with movies_enabled') is useful context, and the return categories imply when to use the tool. However, it does not state when to use this instead of get_showtimes or other sibling tools, leaving alternatives implicit.

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