crunchyroll_get_playheads

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the basic function without disclosing authentication requirements, rate limits, error handling, or what happens for invalid IDs. For a simple read operation, more context is needed.

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 concise sentence, front-loading the main action and resource with no extraneous 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?

Given no output schema, the description should explain the return format or behavior. It does not mention what is returned (e.g., a mapping of content IDs to positions), nor does it address errors or prerequisites like authentication. Incomplete for a tool with no annotation support.

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 100% with the parameter description 'List of episode/movie content IDs to check progress for'. The tool description adds 'playhead position' which refines the meaning, but adds minimal extra value over the schema.

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 verb 'Get', the resource 'watch progress (playhead position)', and the input 'specific content IDs'. It is distinct from sibling tools like update_playhead (write) and continue_watching (list) by focusing on querying progress for given IDs.

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 you have content IDs and need their watch progress, but it provides no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance, nor does it mention alternatives like continue_watching or get_history.

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