get-tv-detail

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavior. It reveals nothing about side effects, return format, or safety, making the tool a black box. A minimal description for a read-only operation would at least imply a safe retrieval, but this does not.

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 short, but it is under-specified rather than concise. A good concise description would pack in the tool's purpose, but 'get tv detail' is tautological and provides no value beyond the tool name.

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?

With only one parameter and no output schema, the tool is relatively simple, but the description still fails to specify what 'detail' means or what the agent should expect. The schema covers the input, but the description leaves the purpose and result ambiguous.

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 schema fully describes the single 'id' parameter as a Douban TV ID with an example, covering 100% of parameter semantics. The tool description itself adds no parameter information beyond the schema, making the baseline of 3 appropriate.

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 'get tv detail' merely restates the tool name, providing no specific verb+resource beyond the name itself. It fails to distinguish this from sibling tools like 'get-movie-detail' or 'search-movie'.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The description does not mention any context, prerequisites, or exclusions, leaving the agent without information to choose it correctly.

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