metacritic_tv_critic_reviews

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

No annotations provided. Description mentions 'Credential-free public Metacritic data' implying no auth required, but does not disclose rate limits, pagination behavior beyond 'paginated', or any potential side effects. As a read-only operation, it's acceptable but could be more specific.

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?

Two sentences with no wasted words. Covers purpose, output fields, and data type. Front-loaded with verb and resource.

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?

No output schema, but description details the fields returned. Mentions pagination. Could be more complete by describing default sort order, or error handling for invalid slugs, but sufficient for a simple list tool.

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 4 parameters (page, slug, sort, per_page) have schema descriptions, so baseline is 3. The tool description does not add additional context beyond the schema, e.g., acceptable sort values or slug format. No extra value provided.

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?

Clearly states it lists critic reviews for a Metacritic TV show. Specifies the returned fields: publication, score, quote, author, source URL. Distinguishes from sibling tools like metacritic_game_critic_reviews and metacritic_tv_user_reviews by explicitly mentioning 'TV show' and 'critic reviews'.

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 states when to use (for TV show critic reviews) but lacks explicit exclusions or alternative tool mentions. It does not discuss prerequisites like needing a valid slug or handling of missing data.

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