Search titles and people

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

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive, open-world), so the bar is lower. The description adds genuine behavioral context beyond them: what fields come back, that results are capped at `limit` (default 10), and that the year filter only applies to movie/tv searches, not person or multi.

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?

It is front-loaded with purpose and the routing rule, then details returns and defaults. It is dense and mostly earns its space, though the year-filter explanation partially duplicates the schema's own year parameter description.

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 correctly takes on the burden of describing return values (id, title/name, release date, overview, popularity) and the result cap. Combined with the routing guidance and defaults, an agent has everything needed to call 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%, so the baseline is 3, but the description reinforces defaults and cross-parameter behavior: `limit` default of 10, "multi" as the media_type default, and the year filter's applicability. It also discloses a return-side effect not in the schema (each multi result carries a media_type field), which is slightly beyond the baseline.

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 ("Search for movies, TV shows or people by name") and distinguishes itself from the sibling get_movie/get_tv_show/get_person tools, which are detail lookups rather than searches. An agent can identify the tool's role without opening the schema.

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?

It gives clear when-to-use context: "Call this first when you have a title or a name and need the numeric id that the other tools require," which effectively routes the agent from search to the get_* tools. It also advises using media_type "multi" when the kind is unknown. It stops short of naming specific alternative siblings or stating when not to search.

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