usecase_search_movies_by_actor

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

The description discloses that the tool 'runs curated Cypher in read mode', which informs the agent that the operation is read-only and uses a predefined query. However, it does not elaborate on return format, permissions, or error behavior, leaving some gaps.

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 sentences, with the main purpose front-loaded. The second sentence adds useful context about the tool's origin and read-only nature. No filler words.

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 a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description covers the essential aspects: purpose, parameter description, and read-only behavior. The lack of an output schema is acceptable given the simple purpose, though a note about the response format would improve completeness.

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?

The schema already provides a full description for the 'actor' parameter ('Full name of the actor'), so the description doesn't need to add parameter details. The description implicitly references the parameter but adds no additional semantic nuance.

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's function with a specific verb ('Find') and resource ('movies'), scoped by actor. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools, which target different domains (synthetic identity, high-risk transactions).

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 gives a clear use case ('Find movies a given actor appeared in') but does not explicitly discuss alternatives or when not to use it. The sibling tools are unrelated, so no exclusions are needed, but explicit guidance is missing.

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