Skip to main content
Glama
Crawlora-org

Crawlora MCP

Official

rottentomatoes_movies

Fetch details for up to 20 Rotten Tomatoes movies in one call by ID or path, including scores, consensus, runtime, release data, and where to watch.

Instructions

Rotten Tomatoes movie details, several at once. Returns the details of up to 20 Rotten Tomatoes movies in one call, in the order requested. Each entry carries the title, synopsis, path and URL, ems_id, runtime, release date/year, production companies, the release runs with distributors, the Tomatometer and Popcornmeter scores, the score variants for all critics, top critics, all audience and verified audience, the critics and audience consensus, and where_to_watch: the public streaming, rental and purchase offers with provider name, link, licence, quality, price and availability date. Those are public provider pages, not playable media URLs. Identifiers that resolve to nothing are listed in data.not_found instead of failing the call. Pass exactly one of ids (Rotten Tomatoes ems_id values) or paths (Rotten Tomatoes movie paths or URLs); the paths form resolves each path first, so it costs one extra upstream read per path. The headline Tomatometer and Popcornmeter carry no counts; review and rating counts are in the score variants (for the number of critic reviews read scores.critics_all.review_count). Review samples are not returned here: use /rottentomatoes/movie/reviews for reviews. data.fetched_at is the UTC fetch time.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
idsNoComma-separated Rotten Tomatoes ems_id values, 1 to 20
pathsNoComma-separated Rotten Tomatoes movie paths or URLs, 1 to 20

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv1.17.18

TDQS

A4.6/5.0
Behavior5/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does: unresolvable identifiers go to `data.not_found` instead of failing, output order mirrors input order, `where_to_watch` entries are public provider pages not playable media, headline scores carry no counts (counts live in score variants), and `fetched_at` is UTC. That is exactly the non-obvious behavioral context an agent needs.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loads purpose and scope, then the payload, then the input-mode rules. The long field enumeration is dense but justified because there is no output schema; a couple of clauses (e.g. the parenthetical about `scores.critics_all.review_count`) could be tightened.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

No output schema and no annotations, so the description must explain the return shape and edge behavior, which it does comprehensively: field inventory, not-found handling, ordering, timestamp semantics, and exclusions. An agent can invoke and interpret results without further information.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100%, so the two string parameters are already documented; the description still adds value the schema lacks — that the two are mutually exclusive and that `paths` incurs an extra upstream read per entry. It does not restate formats, which is fine given the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource with scope: returns Rotten Tomatoes movie details for up to 20 titles in one call, in requested order. The batch framing plus the 1-20 limit clearly separates it from the single-movie sibling, and the enumerated payload (scores, where_to_watch, release runs) makes the purpose unmistakable.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives a real routing rule for the two input modes ("pass exactly one of `ids` or `paths`") with a cost tradeoff (paths cost one extra upstream read each), and routes review needs to the reviews endpoint. It stops short of naming the single-movie sibling as the alternative for one-off lookups, so guidance is clear but not fully exhaustive.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools