Search TV shows

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safe read-only nature is covered. The description adds value beyond annotations by specifying 'No sign-in required' and clarifying the output (IMDb ids). This is useful behavioral context, though it does not detail edge cases or rate limits.

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 two concise sentences, front-loaded with the primary action, and every word adds value. No fluff or redundancy.

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 (one parameter, no output schema) and the presence of annotations, the description covers the essential context: source (showfeed.site), input (title), output (IMDb ids), downstream usage, and auth requirement. This is complete for the tool's complexity.

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 description coverage is 100%, with the query parameter fully documented including an example. The description itself does not add additional meaning beyond the schema, so the baseline 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 states a specific action ('Searches showfeed.site for TV shows by title') with a clear resource and scope. It also distinguishes from sibling tools by mentioning the output ('IMDb ids') and downstream tools ('shows_get or shows_find_torrents'), and the title 'Search TV shows' separates it from movies_search.

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 indicates the intended workflow by stating that returned IMDb ids should be passed to shows_get or shows_find_torrents, which provides clear context for when to use this tool. However, it does not explicitly mention when not to use it or name alternatives like movies_search, so it falls short of a 5.

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