Retrieve a list of popular TV shows from TMDB by providing an API key and optional page number.
Get popular TV shows from TMDB.
This tool declares no required parameters. Add optional parameters from the input schema as needed.
{
"id": 1,
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"method": "tools/call",
"params": {
"arguments": {},
"name": "tmdb_popular_tv"
}
}| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| page | No | ||
| api_key | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.5Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
No annotations provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It only states 'Get popular TV shows', failing to mention pagination (despite a `page` parameter), rate limits, or the meaning of 'popular'. The return format is also unspecified.
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 a single short sentence with no waste, but given the tool's complexity (2 parameters, many siblings), it is too minimal to be effective. It lacks necessary front-loaded context about pagination or alternatives.
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?
Without an output schema, the description should explain return values or pagination. It does not. Combined with low parameter documentation and no usage guidelines, the description is incomplete for correct tool use.
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%, and the description does not mention either parameter (`page`, `api_key`). The agent receives no guidance on purpose or constraints of these inputs, leaving them entirely undocumented.
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 action ('Get'), resource ('popular TV shows'), and source ('from TMDB'). Among sibling tools, it distinctly contrasts with `tmdb_search_tv`, `tmdb_tv`, and `tmdb_trending`, making its purpose unambiguous.
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 guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. With multiple TMDB TV-related siblings, the lack of usage context (e.g., 'for a list of trending shows use tmdb_trending') makes it harder for the agent to choose correctly.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.