Get Anime Detail

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and open-world. The description adds detailed return fields (title, synopsis, stats, etc.) and conditional inclusion of my_list_status, which is valuable behavioral context beyond annotations.

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?

Description is extremely concise: one sentence for purpose, one sentence enumerating returned content. No fluff, every sentence adds value.

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?

Given no output schema, the description fully enumerates returned fields and notes conditional data. It covers all expected aspects for a simple detail-fetch tool, with no gaps.

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 coverage for anime_id is 100%, and the description provides no additional meaning beyond the schema's own description. Baseline of 3 is appropriate as no extra semantics are needed.

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 fetches full public details for one anime by its MAL id, using specific verb 'Fetch' and resource 'anime'. It distinguishes itself from siblings like search_anime (returns list) and get_anime_ranking (ranking list).

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 usage: when you have a specific MAL id and want detailed info. It indirectly guides usage by mentioning the required parameter, but lacks explicit when-not or alternative tools mention. However, context signals and sibling names fill the gap.

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