seasonal_candidates

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It mentions 'server-filtered' and 'apply residual preference heuristics', but the latter is opaque and could imply modification. It does not clarify whether the tool is read-only, destructive, or requires specific permissions. The heuristic application is undefined, risking misinterpretation.

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 single sentence, which is concise, but the phrase 'apply residual preference heuristics' is jargon and reduces clarity. It could be more front-loaded and use simpler terms. Overall, it is brief but not optimally clear.

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?

Despite having an output schema (not shown) and 9 parameters, the description offers minimal context. It does not explain the return format, pagination, or server-filtering details. With no annotations, the description should provide a richer overview, but it is incomplete for a tool of this complexity.

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 has 9 parameters with 0% schema description coverage, meaning the schema itself provides no documentation. The tool description does not mention any parameters, adding no meaning beyond the schema. For a tool with this many parameters, the description should explain their purpose and usage, but it fails entirely.

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 states it fetches server-filtered seasonal anime candidates, which is a clear verb+resource. However, 'apply residual preference heuristics' is vague and does not distinguish this tool from the sibling 'seasonal_anime', which likely performs a similar function. The purpose is adequate but lacks specificity for differentiation.

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?

No usage guidelines are provided. The description does not indicate when to use this tool versus alternatives like seasonal_anime, nor does it specify prerequisites or contexts where the tool is appropriate. This leaves the agent without guidance on selection.

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