list_my_watchlist

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

The description adds context beyond the annotations by specifying that the data is scoped to the authenticated user and is the 'current' watchlist, which complements the readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. It doesn't describe pagination behavior, but the annotations and output schema already cover the safety profile.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler. Every word adds meaning, and the most important information (read, watchlist, scope) comes first.

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 definition is adequate for a safe read-only operation with an output schema and annotations, but it leaves the single input parameter undocumented and does not explicitly mention authentication prerequisites or pagination semantics. For this low-complexity tool, these gaps keep it at minimum viable rather than complete.

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 the only parameter, max_pages. An agent can infer that it limits pagination from the name, but there is no explicit statement of page size or behavior, so the description fails to compensate for the schema gap.

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 uses a specific verb ('Read') and a precise resource ('authenticated user's current IMDb Watchlist'), making the tool's function unmistakable. It also separates this tool from sibling read tools like list_my_ratings by naming the watchlist rather than ratings.

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 the usage context: call this when you need the authenticated user's current watchlist. However, it gives no explicit when-not-to-use guidance or pointers to alternatives such as add_to_watchlist, remove_from_watchlist, or list_my_ratings, so the guidance is only implicit.

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