boxofficemojo_year_domestic

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'normalized release rows' but does not disclose behavioral traits such as rate limits, pagination, data freshness, or whether the data is cached. The output format is vaguely described.

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 a single sentence that is concise and front-loaded with the main purpose. It wastes no words, but could be slightly more structured (e.g., separating purpose and output format).

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 tool has one parameter and no output schema. The description provides enough context for a simple tool: it specifies the source (Box Office Mojo domestic yearly chart), the output (normalized release rows), and the scope (domestic yearly). However, it does not explain what 'normalized release rows' are, slightly reducing completeness.

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?

The schema has 100% coverage for the single year parameter with a clear description. The description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema, but the schema itself is sufficient. Baseline score of 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?

Description clearly states it is for domestic yearly box office data, returning normalized release rows from Box Office Mojo's calendar-grosses chart. The resource and verb (returns domestic yearly box office) are specific, and it distinguishes from siblings like boxofficemojo_year_worldwide (worldwide) and boxofficemojo_weekend_domestic (weekly).

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 use for retrieving domestic yearly box office data, but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., boxofficemojo_date_domestic or boxofficemojo_weekend_domestic). No when-not-to-use guidance is provided.

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