imdb_search_title

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully discloses critical behaviors: credential-free access, pagination limits (first page only, no cursor), limit clamping to 50, include-only list semantics, and specific unsupported values. This is exceptional transparency for a complex tool.

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 dense but efficient single paragraph. Every sentence conveys a constraint or behavioral detail; there is no filler or redundant repetition of schema information.

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 highly complex tool with 28 optional parameters, the description covers the most critical operational constraints: required filters, pagination behavior, list semantics, and unsupported features. It also hints at return fields (`total`/`has_more`), providing a complete operational picture.

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 already covers all 28 parameters with descriptions, but the description adds important semantics beyond the schema: which parameters are include-only, that limit defaults to 25 and clamps to 50, and that certain groups values are unsupported. This adds meaningful context.

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 the tool performs IMDb advanced title search and returns normalized results from the specific imdb.com/search/title/ page. It distinguishes from sibling search tools like imdb_search by specifying 'advanced' and the exact URL, making the purpose unambiguous.

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 gives clear context: at least one filter is required, sort/limit alone are insufficient, and unsupported features are listed. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools for unsupported cases, so it stops short of explicit when/when-not guidance relative to siblings.

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