boxofficemojo_brand

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It mentions 'public' (suggesting no auth) and 'normalized release rows' (indicating a specific data format), but does not disclose other behaviors like rate limits, error handling, or data freshness. Adequate but not thorough.

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 sentences with clear front-loading of purpose, followed by specific usage instruction. No extraneous words; every sentence adds value.

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 parameter set (3 params, no output schema), the description covers core functionality and usage. However, it omits what 'normalized release rows' contain or what happens on invalid input, leaving minor gaps.

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% with basic descriptions for each parameter. The description adds critical usage constraint 'pass exactly one', which is not in the schema. It provides actionable guidance beyond the schema's optional markers.

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 returns 'brand detail' as 'normalized release rows' from a Box Office Mojo brand page, using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes itself from siblings like boxofficemojo_brands which likely lists multiple brands.

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?

The description implies usage by stating to pass exactly one parameter, but does not explicitly contrast with alternative tools (e.g., boxofficemojo_brands) or provide when-not-to-use guidance. Usage context is implied but not fully explained.

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