anilist_recommendations

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable behavioral details: returns 'titles ranked by recommendation count with format, score, and genres'. No contradiction with 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?

Three sentences, no redundant words. First sentence defines purpose, second gives usage trigger, third summarizes output. Efficient 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 many sibling tools, the description clearly covers the use case and output. No output schema exists, but the description mentions key return fields. Could mention the 'limit' parameter behavior, but schema already covers it.

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 all four parameters are described in the schema. The description does not add new meaning to the parameters but mentions output fields (format, score, genres) which are not part of the input schema. Baseline 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?

Description clearly states the tool 'Get community recommendations' for 'a specific anime or manga', and distinguishes itself by providing explicit usage context (e.g., 'I liked X, what else should I watch?'). This differentiates it from siblings like anilist_similar and anilist_sequels.

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 states when to use: 'when the user asks for shows similar to a specific title, or says "I liked X, what else should I watch?"'. Does not explicitly state when not to use or mention alternatives, but the context is clear enough for an agent to decide.

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