list_genres

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already communicates the safe read-only nature. The description adds the behavioral detail that the result is deduplicated ('distinct'), but does not mention pagination, filtering behavior, or other operational aspects despite the schema indicating such features.

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 extremely concise (four words) and front-loaded with the core purpose. However, it is under-specified for a tool with numerous parameters, so the brevity is not effectively balanced with needed detail.

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 9 parameters and no parameter descriptions, this tool is complex, yet the description offers only a bare purpose. The output schema exists but that doesn't compensate for missing parameter semantics or usage context. The description is inadequate for an agent to use this tool correctly.

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 schema has 9 parameters with 0% description coverage. The description does not explain any parameter semantics, such as how 'search', 'series_id', or 'library_id' affect results. It fails to compensate for the lack of schema descriptions.

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 'List distinct genres' clearly identifies the action (list) and the resource (genres), with 'distinct' adding specificity. It distinguishes from siblings like list_authors or list_tags by the resource type, though it doesn't explicitly reference alternatives.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus similar list tools (e.g., list_tags, list_publishers). It does not mention any exclusions, prerequisites, or context for use.

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