search_movie_tmdb

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, openWorldHint and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is fully covered externally. The description adds only the list of fields surfaced (year, rating, overview); it says nothing about match behavior, rate limits, empty-result handling, or pagination. Given an output schema exists, this is an acceptable but thin contribution.

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?

One purpose sentence followed by a compact Args block; front-loaded and free of filler. The Args formatting is somewhat boilerplate but each line is short and relevant.

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?

For a simple two-parameter search with an output schema, the essentials are present, so an agent can call it. It still lacks notes on fuzzy matching, result ordering, and behavior on no matches, which matter for a search tool with an openWorldHint.

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 0%, so the description carries the burden, and it does document both parameters via the Args block. However, the limit entry mostly restates the schema default and type, and movie_name only adds title examples without clarifying exact vs partial matching or language/region behavior.

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?

States a specific verb (search) and resource (TMDB movie information), and enumerates the data returned: release year, ratings, overview. That distinguishes it clearly from search_actor_movies and search_spotify among the siblings, though the description never explicitly names those alternatives.

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: you use it when you have a movie title and want metadata. There is no explicit when-to-use vs when-not-to-use guidance, no mention of the actor-oriented siblings, and no note on what to do when a title is ambiguous or returns nothing.

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