anilist_genre_list

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

The description adds value beyond annotations by specifying that it list all valid items, groups them by category, and includes descriptions. This aligns with the readOnlyHint and destructiveHint=false, providing clear behavioral context without contradiction.

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 extremely concise with two sentences that front-load the purpose and usage guidance. Every sentence is necessary and informative, with no irrelevant details.

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 simplicity, no output schema, and annotations that indicate it is read-only, the description fully covers what the tool returns (genres and tags grouped by category with descriptions). It is complete and unambiguous.

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 100% coverage with clear descriptions for all three parameters (includeAdultTags, filter, category). The tool description does not add any additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, so a baseline score of 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 clearly states that the tool lists all valid AniList genres and content tags, uses a specific verb (list), and specifies the resource (genres and tags). It also distinguishes itself from potential sibling tools like 'anilist_genres' by emphasizing it returns both genres and tags grouped by category with descriptions.

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 instructs to use it before genre-filtering tools to ensure valid genre names, providing clear context for when to use it. It does not mention specific alternatives or when not to use it, but the guidance is sufficient for an agent to understand its role.

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