seerr_media_titles

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

With readOnlyHint=true already present, the description adds value by detailing the operation signatures and parameters, but it doesn't disclose additional behavioral traits such as authentication requirements, rate limits, or output shape. It stays within the safe read-only context without going beyond the annotation.

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 well-organized bulleted list, front-loaded with the core instruction 'Pass operation and an arguments dict.' Every line communicates a distinct operation and its parameters, with no redundancy or fluff.

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 the dispatcher pattern and the presence of an output schema, the description covers all operations and their parameters comprehensively. It lacks some contextual notes (like common use cases or error behavior), but it is adequately complete for a read-only tool with schema-backed outputs.

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 is minimal (only 'operation' and 'arguments'), so the description's per-operation parameter lists with defaults (e.g., page=1, language=None) significantly fill the gap. It clarifies what arguments each operation accepts, though it doesn't specify types or formats for those arguments.

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 it handles 'seerr media titles operations' and enumerates 13 specific get operations for movies, TV, people, and collections. This distinguishes it from sibling tools that focus on search, requests, or settings, though it doesn't explicitly contrast with those alternatives.

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 explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus sibling tools like seerr_search or seerr_discover. The description implies usage through the operation list (you need an ID), but it doesn't state 'use this for retrieving known media IDs' or mention any exclusions or prerequisites.

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