bms_get_movie_details

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

With no annotations, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It explicitly enumerates the return content (poster URLs, trailer links, cast/crew profiles, etc.), which is transparent about what the tool produces. It does not mention side effects, but as a retrieval tool this is sufficient.

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 front-loaded with a clear title line, then a detailed paragraph. It is structured with an Args section that cleanly lists parameters. Slightly verbose but every sentence adds value; no 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?

The description is complete for an agent to call correctly: it covers both parameters, explains the output comprehensively, and the presence of an output schema further reduces ambiguity. No missing information needed for invocation is apparent.

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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It does so thoroughly: movie_code is described as a BookMyShow event code with an example format ('ET00378770') or a full URL, and city is described as a slug with a default value. This fully compensates for the schema's gaps.

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 purpose: 'Retrieves comprehensive movie metadata' and lists specific data types (plot synopsis, duration, ratings, URLs, cast/crew). It distinguishes from siblings like bms_get_movies (list) and bms_get_showtimes (times) by focusing on details for a single movie.

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 usage when a movie code or URL is known and details are needed, but it does not explicitly contrast with siblings or state when NOT to use it. No alternative tools are mentioned, so the agent must infer the appropriate context from the resource type.

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