tmdb_search

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the interleaving behavior and the public nature of the data. However, it does not mention rate limits, output format, pagination, or error handling. The disclosure is adequate but not comprehensive for a tool with no annotations.

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: three sentences with no fluff. The most important information ('Search TMDB') is front-loaded. Every sentence adds value, covering scope, behavior, and authentication status. No redundancy or unnecessary details.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (3 parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is fairly complete. It covers purpose, scope, behavior for unscoped queries, and credential requirements. However, it lacks mention of return value structure (e.g., array of results with common fields), which would help an agent understand what to expect. Still, it is more than minimal.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds minimal parameter context (e.g., 'unscoped query' implies the 'type' parameter), but does not provide additional meaning beyond what the schema already describes. The limit and query parameters are self-explanatory in the schema.

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 it searches TMDB for movies, TV shows, and people. It specifies that unscoped queries interleave results across all three types, distinguishing it from sibling tools like tmdb_movie, tmdb_tv, and tmdb_person which are type-specific. The verb 'Search' and resource 'TMDB' are precise.

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 implies when to use this tool: for cross-type searches. It clarifies behavior of unscoped queries interleaving results, hinting that for type-specific results, one should use the dedicated tools (tmdb_movie, etc.). The mention of 'Credential-free' provides context. However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or list alternatives.

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