get_aliases

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

There are no annotations, so the description itself must declare behavioral intent. It clearly states the operation is read-only ('List', 'reads them') and does not claim any mutation or side effect. It doesn't go into error cases or auth, but for a simple list operation with an output schema present, the essential behavior is disclosed.

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 three short, focused sentences. It front-loads the core purpose, gives the domain definition in the middle, and closes with the relevant sibling pointer. Every sentence adds value and none repeats schema content.

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 simple parameter set (one required slug, one optional filter), a complete output schema, and the explicit read-only and create-alias routing, nothing necessary for an agent to select and invoke this tool correctly is missing.

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 input schema already describes both parameters with 100% coverage: series is required and season is an optional filter. The description adds context about what scene exceptions are but does not add new details about the series_slug or season formats' that aren't in the schema, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 names a specific verb ('List'), a specific resource ('scene exceptions (aliases)'), and a scope ('for a series'), so the agent knows exactly what the tool returns. It also defines the term and separates reading from writing by naming create_alias.

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 explicitly says 'This tool reads them' and then directs the agent to use create_alias when adding new ones. This provides a clear decision rule over when to use is tool v. a mutation sibling.

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