Retrieve TMDB movie details by ID, including overview, tagline, genres, runtime, countries, cast, crew, budget, revenue, and aggregate rating.
Get a TMDB movie. Returns a TMDB movie: overview, tagline, genres, countries, runtime, budget/revenue, top-billed cast, top crew (director/writer), and aggregate rating.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | TMDB movie id |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.5.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully enumerates the returned payload (overview, tagline, genres, runtime, budget/revenue, cast, crew, rating) with no output schema, but says nothing about auth needs, how the id is obtained, or localization options.
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 short sentences, front-loaded with the core action and then the payload. Slight redundancy in 'Get a TMDB movie. Returns a TMDB movie:' but nothing is bloated.
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?
For a one-param lookup with no output schema, listing the return fields is the right move and largely covers completeness. It still omits how to obtain the required id and any response-shaping options, leaving a modest 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?
Schema coverage is 100% (single 'id' param documented as 'TMDB movie id'). The description adds no format or sourcing detail beyond the schema, so the baseline 3 applies.
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?
States a specific verb (Get) and resource (a TMDB movie), and the return-field list confirms it is a detail-fetch for a single title, which distinguishes it from tmdb_search or tmdb_movie_list. It never names those siblings explicitly, so it stops short of a 5.
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?
No when-to-use context and no alternatives. It does not say the id comes from tmdb_search, nor when to prefer this over tmdb_movie_list or tmdb_collection. Nothing routes the agent between the many tmdb_* siblings.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.