edit_movies

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses important partial-update semantics with 'Only the given fields change' and explains apply_tags behavior. However, it does not mention potential side effects like move_files moving actual files on disk, any required permissions, or what the response contains.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the primary purpose, and no wasted words. The second sentence adds the critical partial-update safety note, and the third clarifies the tag mode behavior. Every sentence earns its place.

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?

For an edit tool with 8 parameters and no output schema, the description conveys the core operation and the key safety guarantee clearly. It could be slightly more complete by explicitly noting that move_files may physically move files and by mentioning what the response returns, but the schema covers the parameter details.

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 the schema already documents all eight parameters in detail. The description adds little beyond grouping the fields and paraphrasing apply_tags, which is already described in the schema. Baseline 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?

The description opens with 'Bulk-edit movies' and names the specific resource (movies) plus the exact fields affected: monitoring, quality profile, minimum availability, root folder, and tags. This distinguishes it clearly from update_movie, which is implied to be a single-movie operation.

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 this is for bulk editing multiple movies at once, especially with 'movie_ids' being plural and 'in one call'. However, it never explicitly says when to use this instead of update_movie or any other alternative, nor does it state any exclusions.

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