Fetch a TMDB TV show's overview, genres, cast, crew, episode count, and rating using its ID.
Get a TMDB TV show. Returns a TMDB TV show: overview, tagline, genres, countries, episode count, first/last air year, top-billed cast, top crew (creator), and aggregate rating.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| id | Yes | TMDB TV show id |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.5.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It discloses the rich payload (cast, crew, episode count, aggregate rating), which is useful context and partially substitutes for the missing output schema, but says nothing about read-only nature, rate limits, id format, or error behavior.
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, front-loaded with the verb and the payload, but the second sentence redundantly restates 'Returns a TMDB TV show' after already saying 'Get a TMDB TV show'. The leading clause wastes space that could carry usage guidance.
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 single-parameter lookup with no output schema and no annotations, the field enumeration is what makes the description usable — an agent knows what it will receive. Missing only id-sourcing guidance and error/edge behavior.
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 description coverage is 100% and the single 'id' parameter is already documented in the schema as the TMDB TV show id. The description adds no syntax, format, or example beyond that, so 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 and resource (get a TMDB TV show), and enumerates the returned fields, so an agent knows exactly what it fetches. It does not, however, distinguish itself from tmdb_movie, tmdb_tv_list, or tmdb_search, which share the domain.
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?
There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites, and no routing to alternatives such as tmdb_search for finding an id. The agent must infer that this is the detail-fetch step after a search.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.