tv_seasonFetch details for a specific TV season by tv_id and season_number. Returns season name, overview, air date, episode count, and a list of episodes with name, air date, and overview.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| tv_id | Yes | ||
| language | No | ||
| season_number | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | No | Season ID | |
| air_date | No | Air date | |
| episodes | No | Episodes in season | |
| season_number | No | Season number |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / examplesAdded value: +[
+ {
+ "season_number": 1,
+ "tv_id": 1396
+ }
+]Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "properties": {
+ "air_date": {
+ "description": "Air date",
+ "type": "string"
+ },
+ "episodes": {
+ "description": "Episodes in season",
+ "items": {
+ "properties": {
+ "episode_number": {
+ "description": "Episode number",
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "id": {
+ "description": "Episode ID",
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "name": {
+ "description": "Episode name",
+ "type": "string"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+ },
+ "type": "array"
+ },
+ "id": {
+ "description": "Season ID",
+ "type": "number"
+ },
+ "season_number": {
+ "description": "Season number",
+ "type": "number"
+ }
+ },
+ "type": "object"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and idempotentHint. Description adds return structure but lacks details on language behavior or potential limits. Acceptable given annotation coverage.
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?
Two efficient sentences, purpose front-loaded, no redundant information.
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?
Covers essential return fields. With output schema present, description need not be exhaustive. Could mention episode ordering or pagination, but not critical.
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?
With 0% schema coverage, the description mentions tv_id and season_number but does not explain the optional language parameter. Adds some meaning but incomplete.
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 it fetches TV season details by tv_id and season_number, and lists return fields. It distinguishes from siblings like tv and tv_episode.
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?
Implied usage for season details, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use compared to alternative tools like tv or tv_episode.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.