metacritic_browse

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It discloses that the data is public and credential-free, but lacks details about rate limits, response format, or any side effects. The description does not contradict annotations (none exist), but it is 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 mostly concise with two sentences, but the first sentence is repeated verbatim. The key information is front-loaded. Minor redundancy reduces efficiency slightly.

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 functionality, output (paginated title cards with scores), and access (public). It does not explain error handling, rate limits, or output structure beyond what is implied. Given the tool's simplicity, this is adequate but could be more detailed.

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?

All 5 parameters have schema descriptions (100% coverage), but those descriptions are terse (e.g., 'Sort order'). The description adds meaningful context by listing example sort values (Metascore, popularity, release date) and mentioning genre and content type. It does not fully enumerate allowed values, but it enhances understanding.

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's purpose: 'Browse Metacritic titles' with specific filtering, sorting, and pagination. It distinguishes from sibling tools (e.g., metacritic_game, metacritic_movie) which target individual items rather than listings.

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 indicates when to use: for browsing Metacritic titles with optional genre and sort options. It notes 'Credential-free public Metacritic data,' implying no authentication. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use or name alternatives, though the sibling context implies that for specific titles, other tools are appropriate.

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