play

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden and does partially deliver: it discloses the two-step interaction (opens the detail page, then presses OK to start the highlighted stream), which is genuinely useful. It omits auth/pairing requirements, failure modes, and whether it blocks, leaving meaningful gaps for a mutation-style tool.

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?

Three short, front-loaded sentences with no padding; the core action leads and examples follow. Minor grammatical awkwardness ('presses OK') but structurally efficient.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. For a state-changing playback tool with zero annotations, the description covers the basic workflow but omits prerequisites (pairing/login), reliability concerns (what happens if the detail page or stream fails), and the undocumented content_type parameter.

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 is 0%, so the description must compensate. It documents imdb_id format ('tt1375666') and the season/episode-for-series rule, covering 3 of 4 params, but says nothing about the content_type parameter that controls movie-vs-series interpretation, leaving a real 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?

States a specific verb (Open) and resource (a movie or series episode in Stremio) plus the target platform (Android TV), which separates it from desktop/cast siblings. However, it does not name the most likely-confusable siblings (stremio_desktop_play, stremio_cast_play) to make the distinction explicit.

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?

'For series pass season and episode' gives conditional usage for one case, implying when season/episode are needed. But there is no guidance on when to use this over the many other playback tools (desktop_play, cast_play, tv_control), and no stated prerequisites.

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