anilist_staff

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint true and destructiveHint false. The description adds functional context (returns staff roles and characters with voice actors) without contradicting annotations. No mention of side effects or safety, but annotations already cover that.

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, front-loaded with purpose in the first sentence. No wasted words; every sentence adds information.

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?

No output schema exists, but the description explains the return includes production staff, roles, and characters with voice actors. This gives sufficient context for an agent to understand the tool's output.

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% with parameter descriptions. The description adds value by explaining the language parameter defaults to Japanese and that title can be used as fallback, providing context 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 it retrieves staff and voice actor credits for an anime or manga, using specific verbs ('Get') and resource ('staff and voice actor credits'). It distinguishes from the sibling tool 'anilist_staff_search' by focusing on specific title credits rather than searching by staff name.

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?

Provides explicit instruction to use when the user asks about directors, writers, or voice actors. Mentions default language and support for alternatives, but does not explicitly exclude use cases like searching for staff profiles.

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