anilist_mal_import

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

Annotations already indicate read-only and non-destructive behavior. The description adds that no MAL authentication is needed and details the output (taste profile + recommendations), providing value beyond annotations.

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 with no unnecessary words. The first sentence states action and result, the second provides usage condition and output. Exceptionally concise and well-structured.

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 lack of output schema, the description covers the return value (taste profile and recommendations). It includes purpose, usage context, input semantics, and behavior, making it fully informative for a 2-parameter tool.

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?

Input schema has 100% description coverage for both parameters, so the description does not need to add much. The description reiterates the limit's purpose but does not add new meaning beyond the schema.

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 imports a MyAnimeList user's completed anime list and generates recommendations, specifying the resource and action. It distinguishes from sibling tools like anilist_kitsu_import by focusing on MAL.

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 'Use when the user mentions their MAL account or wants recs from MAL history,' providing clear context. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tool references, but the guidance is sufficient.

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