seerr_search

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

With readOnlyHint=true, the safety profile is covered. The description adds the dispatcher pattern and operation signatures, but does not disclose additional behaviors such as result formatting, pagination limits, or error handling. The output schema likely covers return values, so the bar is lower.

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?

Two sentences plus a bulleted list, front-loaded with the core dispatch rule. No redundant information, each line adds value. Ideal structure for a structured tool description.

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 tool's moderate complexity (three operations, output schema present), the description covers the essential invocation pattern and operation semantics. Minor gaps like default page behavior are acceptable but could be mentioned for fuller context.

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 only defines operation (enum) and arguments (free-form object), with 0% coverage. The description compensates by listing each operation's signature (query, page, language) and purpose, significantly clarifying what to put in the arguments dict. It could go further with types or value constraints.

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 explicitly states it handles 'seerr search operations' and enumerates three distinct search functions with clear targets (movies/TV/people, companies, keywords). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like seerr_settings or seerr_discover.

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?

It provides the interface pattern (pass operation + arguments dict) and implies usage via the operation list. However, it lacks explicit guidance on when to prefer this tool over siblings like seerr_media_titles or seerr_discover, and does not describe eligibility criteria or alternatives.

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