seerr_get_movie

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

The readOnlyHint annotation is consistent with the description, so there is no contradiction. However, the description adds no behavioral context—it doesn't disclose whether language affects output, what fields constitute 'details', or any edge cases. It essentially restates the tool's name.

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?

At three words, it is extremely concise and front-loaded with no filler. For a simple getter, this brevity is appropriate, though it borders on under-specification.

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 a simple read-only tool with an output schema and readOnlyHint, the description covers the core purpose. However, it omits parameter semantics and usage guidance, leaving some gaps for an agent. It is adequate but not thorough.

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 0%, and the description does not explain movie_id or language. While movie_id is relatively obvious, language's format/default behavior is ambiguous. The description fails to compensate for the lack of schema documentation.

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 retrieves movie details using a specific verb and resource. However, it doesn't differentiate from sibling movie getters like seerr_get_movie_recommendations or seerr_get_movie_ratings, which could confuse an agent about which tool to choose.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It doesn't mention that this is the canonical endpoint for basic movie metadata or that other tools exist for specific data. The agent must infer solely from the tool name.

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