tv_recommend

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states that recommendations are based on watch history and trending, but does not disclose whether the tool is read-only, requires authentication, or any side effects. This is insufficient for a tool that likely accesses user data.

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 sentence of 8 words, which is very concise. No filler content. However, it could include additional context without becoming verbose, so it loses a point for not being more informative.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown), the description does not need to explain return values. Parameters are well-documented in the schema. However, behavioral context (e.g., safety, data usage) is missing, making the description adequate but not complete.

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 covers both parameters (mood, limit) with descriptions. The description does not add meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so it meets the baseline of 3.

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's purpose: 'Get personalized recommendations based on watch history + trending.' It uses a specific verb and resource, and the basis (watch history + trending) differentiates it from sibling tools like tv_whats_on (current programming) and tv_next (next episode).

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 implies usage context (personalized recommendations), but does not explicitly state when to use or not use this tool over alternatives. Given the sibling tools are numerous and diverse, the context is clear enough for an agent to infer appropriate use.

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