Get TMDB TV Episode

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says 'Gets' which implies a read-only operation, but it does not disclose any other traits such as API key requirements, rate limits, error behavior, or whether the response includes all details or a subset. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond the name.

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 a single concise sentence of ten words. It is front-loaded with the action and resource, and every word contributes to the core meaning. There is no fluff or redundant phrasing, making it highly efficient.

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 lack of annotations and output schema, the description should provide more context to fully enable correct invocation. It lists the kinds of data returned but does not explain the required parameters, the API endpoint behavior, or any constraints. For a tool with four parameters and no other documentation, this is insufficient for an agent to use it reliably without assumptions.

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?

The input schema has 0% description coverage, and the description does not compensate by explaining any parameters. It does not mention seriesId, seasonNumber, episodeNumber, or language, nor how they relate to the episode. The parameters are left entirely to the schema's bare names, which may not be self-explanatory to all agents.

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 the tool gets an episode's details, directors, guest stars, and trailer, using a specific verb ('Gets') and resource ('episode'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like tmdb_get_tv_season (season-level) and tmdb_get_tv_series (series-level), which focus on other scopes.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention prerequisites, exclusions, or explicitly recommend using it for episode-level data. An agent would have to infer the use case solely from the tool name and description, which is insufficient given the many sibling tools.

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