list_cinemas

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden. It transparently discloses that it lists all known cinemas, optionally filters by chain, and that IDs follow a namespaced format ('uci:slug' or 'thespace:numericId'). It does not mention return structure beyond IDs or pagination, but for a simple list tool this is adequate.

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?

Three sentences, each carrying distinct information: what the tool does, when to call it, and the format/importance of the IDs. No wasted words or repetitive 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?

In the absence of an output schema and annotations, the description gives essential operational context: when to call, the purpose (discovering IDs), the ID namespace, and their role in the broader API. It could be more precise about the full result shape, but it is sufficient for an agent to use the tool correctly in a discovery workflow.

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%, and the schema already documents the 'chain' parameter with its enum and 'omit for both' behavior. The description only restates the optional filter, adding nothing beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 applies.

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 uses a specific verb and resource ('List every cinema we know about') and mentions the optional chain filter. It also states that the returned cinema IDs are needed by the other tools, which clearly distinguishes it from the sibling tools list_films and get_showtimes.

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?

It gives explicit when-to-use guidance: 'Call this once at the start of a session to discover cinema ids.' It also explains that the IDs are needed by other tools, establishing it as a prerequisite. However, it does not explicitly contrast it with alternatives or state when not to use it.

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