get_seasons_listFind the years and seasons that have anime data to choose valid arguments for seasonal anime queries.
List the years and seasons that have anime data, so you can pick valid arguments for get_seasonal_anime.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
No arguments | |||
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| seasons | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.9.0Output schema / properties / seasons / items / properties / year / maximumAdded value: +2100Output schema / properties / seasons / items / properties / year / minimumAdded value: +1900Output schema / properties / seasons / items / properties / year / typePrevious value: -"number"New value: +"integer"Output schema / properties / seasons / items / requiredPrevious value: -[
- "seasons"
-]New value: +[
+ "year",
+ "seasons"
+]v0.8.0v0.7.1v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint, covering safety. Description adds that it lists existing data, which is consistent but adds no new behavioral traits beyond what annotations provide.
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?
Single sentence that is front-loaded and conveys the core purpose and usage hint efficiently, with no extraneous content.
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 zero parameters, an output schema, and annotations covering safety, the description provides everything needed: purpose, output type, and relation to another tool. No gaps.
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?
Tool has no parameters, so the description isn't required to explain parameters. Baseline 4 applies as schema coverage is 100% and no enrichment is needed.
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?
Description specifies 'list the years and seasons that have anime data', clearly stating the tool's purpose and output, and distinguishes itself from siblings by linking to get_seasonal_anime.
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 states the tool's purpose is to provide valid arguments for get_seasonal_anime, guiding when to use it. No explicit when-not or alternatives, but the context is well-defined.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.