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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds that this is a multi-facet advanced search, but says nothing about pagination, default limits, result ordering behavior, or how sort/sort_order interact — behavior the agent must infer from the schema.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler; the resource and the distinguishing 'advanced filter' nature come first and nothing is wasted.

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 28 fully documented parameters, an output schema, and annotations covering the safety profile, the description need not explain return values or parameter formats. Its only real gap is the lack of explicit routing versus imdb_search/imdb_title.

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 description coverage is 100%, so all 28 parameters are already documented in the schema with formats, enums-like value lists, defaults and ranges. The description only restates a subset of filter categories and adds no syntax or semantic detail beyond the schema, so baseline 3 applies.

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 gives a specific verb+resource ('IMDb advanced title search') and names the filter families (genre/type/rating/vote/runtime/sort), so the agent knows exactly what the tool does. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling imdb_search, though the word 'advanced' weakly implies a filter-rich variant.

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?

Usage is only implied: the mention of 'advanced ... filters' suggests using this when faceted filtering is needed, but there is no explicit statement of when to prefer this over imdb_search or imdb_title. No exclusions or prerequisites are given.

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