Tv Queue

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full disclosure burden, and it discloses almost nothing: it does not say whether 'clear' destroys the whole queue, whether 'add' requires a resolve step first, whether 'play' targets a TV and what happens if tv_name is omitted, or whether any action has side effects outside the queue. For a multi-action mutation tool this is a substantial gap.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the verb and resource, no filler. It is arguably over-terse for a five-action tool, but nothing in it is wasted.

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 six parameters, five distinct actions, an output schema, and zero annotations, the description should explain per-action behavior and risk (especially 'clear'). It leaves the agent to infer semantics of each action entirely from the schema, which is inadequate for a mutating queue tool.

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%, so every parameter (query, season, episode, tv_name, platform) is already documented in the schema, including action-conditional requirements. The description adds no format, default, or conditional detail beyond the schema baseline, so a 3 is 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?

States a clear verb ('Manage') plus resource ('the play queue') and enumerates the five supported actions, so an agent knows this is the queue-control tool. It does not differentiate itself from near-neighbors like tv_play or tv_next, which could also relate to advancing playback, leaving some ambiguity about which tool owns 'skip'.

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 lists the action values but gives no guidance on when to choose tv_queue over tv_play, tv_next, or tv_cast, nor any prerequisites or ordering context. The action names are already present in the 'action' schema field, so the list adds no routing information.

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