lookup_movie

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 the candidate-style return behavior, the key tmdbId field, and the special case where results already in the library include a Radarr id. It does not mention pagination or external API rate limits, but for a search tool these are not critical omissions.

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 short sentences with no filler. The purpose is front-loaded, followed by the output contract, then the library edge case. 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?

The tool has no output schema, so the description needs to explain return meaning, which it does reasonably. However, it never explicitly states that at least one of term, imdb_id, or tmdb_id is required, especially since the schema marks all parameters as optional. This could lead to a no-parameter invocation.

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 already describes all three parameters with examples, so the description only re-frames them as alternative search modes. It adds the important context that tmdbId is the value add_movie needs, but parameter-level semantics are largely already covered by the schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Search TMDB for movies', and enumerates the accepted lookup keys (free-text, IMDB id, TMDB id). It also distinguishes itself from library-oriented siblings by explaining the output is candidate movies with tmdbId, which is exactly what add_movie consumes.

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 clearly signals when to use this tool: before add_movie, to resolve a TMDB candidate. It also gives a useful conditional behavior: results already in the library carry a Radarr id. However, it does not explicitly name alternative siblings such as list_movies or get_movie, nor 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.