title_sourcesReturn streaming availability for a Watchmode title_id — which services (Netflix, Hulu, etc.) carry it in which regions, with subscription/rent/buy type and price.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| regions | No | ||
| title_id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Input schema / examplesAdded value: +[
+ {
+ "title_id": "12345"
+ },
+ {
+ "regions": "US,GB",
+ "title_id": "12345"
+ }
+]Output schema / (root)Previous value: -nullNew value: +{
+ "description": "Streaming sources where a title is available",
+ "type": "object"
+}Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already indicate read-only, idempotent, non-destructive. Description adds value by detailing the returned fields (services, regions, type, price).
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?
Single sentence, front-loaded with purpose, no filler. Efficiently conveys core functionality.
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?
Output schema exists, but description could mention that regions filtering is optional. Still adequate for a tool with few parameters and rich annotations.
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 has 0% description coverage; description mentions title_id but does not explain regions format or provide parameter details beyond the example.
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?
Clearly states the tool returns streaming availability for a title_id, specifying services, regions, type, and price. Distinct from siblings like 'sources' or 'title_detail'.
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 getting streaming sources of a specific title, but no explicit when-to-use or alternatives compared to similar tools like 'sources'.
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.