imdb_title_filming_locations

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states it 'returns' data, implying a read operation, but does not explicitly mention no side effects, rate limits, authentication needs, or what happens if the title is not found. The description lacks sufficient behavioral context for a data retrieval 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 extremely concise, consisting of two short sentences. The first sentence identifies the purpose, and the second provides critical usage guidance. Every part earns its place with no wasted words. It is well front-loaded.

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 is minimally adequate given the tool's simplicity. It lacks details about the return format or fields (no output schema exists), but 'normalized public IMDb filming-location rows' gives some idea. Given the many sibling tools, a bit more context about the output structure would improve completeness. Score 3 reflects this balance.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with descriptions for both parameters ('IMDb title id' and 'Absolute URL'). The description adds semantic value by specifying that exactly one of `id` or `url` must be passed, clarifying mutual exclusivity that the schema's optional flags do not convey. This goes beyond what the schema provides.

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 that the tool returns 'IMDb title filming locations' as 'normalized public IMDb filming-location rows'. It uses a specific verb ('returns') and resource ('filming locations'), and among many IMDb sibling tools, this one is uniquely focused on filming locations, making its purpose distinct.

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`', which is a clear usage constraint. However, it does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus other IMDb title tools (e.g., for different data like goofs or reviews), but the parameter instruction alone is helpful and above average.

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