imdb_title_credits

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It states the tool returns data (implying read-only), but does not disclose authentication needs, rate limits, or potential side effects. The description is adequate but minimal.

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 extremely concise: two sentences, front-loaded with the tool's identity, then usage instruction. Every word earns its place with no fluff.

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?

Given no output schema, the description should explain what the returned credits look like (e.g., cast list vs crew roles). It only says 'normalized public IMDb full cast and crew sections', which is vague. For a data-returning tool, this is a gap.

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 with descriptions for both parameters (id and url). The description adds critical context: 'Pass exactly one of `id` or `url`', which clarifies the optional-but-one-required constraint not apparent from the schema alone.

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 returns 'normalized public IMDb full cast and crew sections', distinguishing it from other IMDb tools like imdb_title (which returns title details) or imdb_search. The verb 'returns' and resource 'cast and crew sections' are specific.

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 explicitly says 'Pass exactly one of `id` or `url`', providing a clear usage constraint. However, it does not elaborate on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., for awards vs credits), nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions.

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