list_queue

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

With no annotations provided, the description is the only source of behavioral information. It does disclose the listing behavior and the OMDb enrichment tradeoff, and 'List' strongly implies a read operation. It does not mention pagination, ordering, error behavior, or authentication, though the existence of an output schema mitigates some of this.

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 concise sentence front-loads the core action, then adds the only optional behavior worth knowing. No repeated schema information and no filler.

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 two-parameter list operation with an output schema, the description covers the essential action and the one behavioral option that affects output and speed. It leaves out edge cases like invalid profile handling, but the low complexity and output schema make the description sufficiently complete for selecting and invoking the tool.

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 0%, so the description carries the parameter-semantics burden. It clearly explains resolve_titles beyond the schema, noting both the effect (include title/year) and the performance cost (slower). The profile parameter is given meaning through the phrase 'a queue profile's entries,' though its accepted values are not specified.

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 names a specific verb ('List') and a specific resource ('a queue profile's entries'), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_profiles (which lists profiles) and add_to_queue/remove_from_queue (which modify the queue). The optional resolve_titles behavior further cements what the tool does.

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 implies when to use the tool—whenever you need the entries of a queue profile—and its optional resolve_titles flag provides context for a performance tradeoff. However, it does not explicitly contrast it with list_profiles or other sibling tools, or state when the enriched resolve_titles mode should be chosen.

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