lookup_title

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It discloses the core behavior and output fields, and 'via OMDb' implies an external lookup. However, it does not mention failure behavior for invalid or missing IDs, potential rate limits, or whether the call can return null/no result.

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, well-structured sentence that front-loads the verb and resource, then lists the output fields. Every word contributes meaning, and there is no redundancy or 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 one-parameter lookup without output schema or annotations, the description covers the essential input and expected output fields. However, it omits practical details like IMDb id format, behavior on unresolved IDs, and any external API constraints, leaving some gaps for an agent to discover at runtime.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage; the bare property name 'imdb_id' carries little meaning. The description adds that the parameter is an IMDb id and that it maps to title/year/type. It does not specify the expected format, such as whether 'tt' prefix is required, which would improve clarity.

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 is specific and action-oriented: 'Resolve an IMDb id to its title/year/type via OMDb.' It clearly identifies the input, the operation, and the expected output fields. It does not explicitly differentiate from siblings like identify_title or search_title, but the IMDb-id-to-metadata mapping is distinctive enough.

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: when you have an IMDb id and need its title, year, or type. However, it provides no explicit guidance about when not to use it or which sibling tools to prefer, such as search_title for title-based lookup or identify_title for other identification needs.

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