anilist_lookup

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

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds that it returns status, score, progress, and dates, which is helpful but not beyond what the schema implies. It does not disclose any additional behavioral traits like rate limits or authentication.

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?

Two sentences, no wasted words. Front-loaded with the core action and usage prompts.

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 presence of annotations and full schema coverage, the description provides sufficient context for a lookup tool. It mentions what is returned, though it doesn't explain fallback behavior for username (handled by schema).

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 coverage is 100%, so baseline is 3. The description adds no further parameter meaning beyond summarizing the purpose; it does not provide examples or explain the relationship between mediaId and title.

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 specifies the verb 'check' and 'show', the resource 'title on a user's list', and the outcome 'status, score, progress, and dates'. It distinguishes from the sibling 'anilist_list' by noting it avoids fetching the full list.

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?

Explicitly tells when to use: when user asks 'is this on my list?', 'have I seen this?', or wants to check progress/score for a single title. It implies the alternative is the full list tool but does not name it directly.

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