Discover catalog

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so safety and scope are covered externally. The description adds nothing beyond them: no note that results are paginated via cursor, no default page size behavior, no statement about what an empty result or the append_to_response expansion means in practice.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence with no filler or repetition. It is efficient, though efficiency here comes partly from omission rather than disciplined editing.

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?

For an 18-parameter discovery tool with no output schema, the description should explain result shape, pagination contract, and at least the sorting/expansion semantics. Instead the agent is left to reverse-engineer cursor pagination and enum behavior from the schema alone.

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?

With 18 parameters and only 56% schema description coverage, the description carries real compensation duty, yet it only says 'filters and sorting' generically. It never explains the 13-value sort enum, the default of genre_mode, or the append_to_response expansion options that are undocumented in 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 gives a specific verb plus resource (browse the movie/show catalog) with filters and sorting, so the agent knows it is a filtered enumeration tool. It does not distinguish itself from the close sibling search_media, leaving the browse-vs-search boundary implicit.

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?

There is no statement of when to prefer this over search_media, get_media_info, or get_genres, and no exclusions or preconditions. An agent must infer from the word 'browse' that this is the filtered/sorted enumeration path rather than keyword lookup.

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