Get a title's related media

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds valuable behavioral context by listing the specific categories of relations returned and noting that the relation type is included in the output, which goes beyond the structured metadata.

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 two sentences, the first stating the core purpose and the second a practical usage note. Every word earns its place with no redundancy.

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?

The tool is simple (2 required params, read-only, output schema present), and the description covers the essential workflow and output expectations. It is complete for the tool's complexity.

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% with descriptions for both parameters. The description adds meaning by explaining that the ID should be obtained from search_media and that the type parameter determines whether the ID refers to anime or manga, which helps orchestrate the workflow.

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 states a clear action ('Get the anime/manga related to a given title') with a specific resource and enumerates relation types (prequels, sequels, side stories, adaptations, spin-offs). This distinctly differentiates it from siblings like get_media or get_recommendations.

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 explicitly instructs to 'Use search_media first to resolve a title to its AniList ID,' providing a clear prerequisite and workflow. It does not enumerate alternatives or exclusions, but the context makes the intended use unambiguous.

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