boxofficemojo_genre

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden. It discloses that the data is from a public page and that output is normalized release rows, implying a safe read operation. However, it does not describe pagination behavior, rate limits, or any edge cases, leaving some behavioral traits undisclosed.

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?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the tool's purpose, and includes key usage guidance. Every sentence earns its place, with no wasted words.

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?

The description covers the core purpose, data source, and selector constraint. Given no output schema, it only vaguely mentions 'normalized release rows' without detailing fields or sorting/pagination behavior. It is adequate but not rich.

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 descriptions for all six parameters. The description adds a critical constraint that exactly one of id, path, or url must be passed, which is not present in the schema. This provides meaningful semantic guidance beyond the structured fields.

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 normalized release rows from a Box Office Mojo genre page, identifying the tool as genre detail. It distinguishes from siblings like boxofficemojo_genres (which likely lists genres) by specifying the detail scope. The verb 'returns' and resource 'genre page' make the purpose explicit.

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 provides clear usage context: it's for genre detail pages and requires exactly one of id, path, or url. This gives a concrete usage rule. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use this tool, so it lacks exclusions.

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