search_tvdb

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It correctly indicates a read-only search (no destructive side effects). However, it does not mention any authentication, rate limits, or response format. This is sufficient for a simple search tool, but lacks depth.

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 concise sentences with no redundancy. The first sentence states purpose, the second provides usage context, and the third gives next steps. Information is front-loaded and every sentence adds value.

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 that an output schema exists (not shown but indicated), the description does not need to detail return values. It covers when and why to use the tool. It lacks parameter details, but for a simple search tool with two parameters, it is reasonably complete.

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%, so the description must explain parameters. It only names the 'query' parameter implicitly by saying 'by name' and mentions 'language' as a default but no details. The language parameter is not explained at all, leaving ambiguity.

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 the tool's purpose: 'Search TVDB for a show by name and return matching TVDB IDs.' It distinguishes from siblings by specifying the context of resolving AniDB-to-TVDB mapping issues.

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 states when to use the tool: 'when an anime add fails due to AniDB-to-TVDB mapping issues.' It also provides step-by-step guidance: 'Find the correct TVDB ID here, then add the show with add_series.'

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