closest_showing

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses that location is required via lat/lng or a configured default, and that the search is not constrained by date/time. However, it leaves some behavioral details unstated, such as whether results are ordered by distance, whether only currently bookable showtimes count as 'showing,' and what happens if no default location is configured.

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 compact and front-loaded with the main behavior, followed by a one-line use case and a clean parameter list. Every sentence adds useful information, and there is no fluff or repetition.

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?

For a simple lookup tool with an output schema present, the description covers the essential input semantics and the primary use case. It is missing an explicit pointer to date/time-specific alternatives, but the 'regardless of date and time' phrasing helps the agent infer when not to use it. Overall, it is complete enough for a successful call.

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 compensates fully by explaining every parameter: film_id is a MovieGlu numeric id, limit has default/max values, and lat/lng have ranges and optionality. It also clarifies the relationship between optional lat/lng and the configured default location, adding meaning the schema alone does not provide.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Nearest cinemas showing a film.' It also adds a distinctive scope, 'regardless of date and time,' which separates it from date/time-specific showtimes siblings like movie_showtimes and cinema_showtimes. The user-question framing 'where can I see this film at all?' reinforces the intended purpose.

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 gives a clear use case ('For where can I see this film at all?') and states the location prerequisite, including the fallback to a configured default location. It does not name alternatives explicitly or say when not to use this tool, but the 'regardless of date and time' line implies that date-specific queries belong elsewhere.

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