seerr_list_genres_tv

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

The annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, so the agent knows it is a safe read operation. However, the description adds no behavioral context beyond that, and it misidentifies the genre type as movie. No details on language behavior, output format, or TMDB integration nuances.

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 a single short sentence, which is concise in length. However, it is structurally inadequate because it omits the critical 'TV' qualifier and introduces an incorrect 'movie' qualifier, making the sentence harmful rather than helpful. A concise but inaccurate description does not earn 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 is simple with one optional parameter and an output schema, but the description fails to provide the most fundamental context: that this is for TV genres, not movies. It also provides no information about the language parameter, making the description incomplete for effective tool selection and invocation. Sibling tools emphasize the need for clear differentiation.

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 one 'language' parameter with no description (schema coverage 0%). The description does not mention this parameter at all, leaving the agent without any clue about its purpose, allowed values, or default behavior. 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 states 'Get list of official TMDB movie genres', but the tool name is 'seerr_list_genres_tv', indicating TV genres. This is misleading and fails to accurately identify the resource. The presence of a sibling tool 'seerr_list_genres_movie' further highlights the confusion.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool vs alternatives. The description incorrectly specifies 'movie' instead of 'TV', actively misleading the agent about its use case. No mention of the language parameter or context in which TV genres are needed.

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