plex_search_movies

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It mentions that filters are combined with AND logic, but does not discuss safety (e.g., read-only nature), potential side effects, or prerequisites. Given the absence of annotations, this is a significant gap.

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 detailed but well-structured, starting with a brief purpose, then a key behavioral note (AND logic), followed by a parameter list with examples. While it is lengthy, the complexity of 12 parameters justifies the length. It could be slightly more concise, but overall effective.

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 covers how to use the tool with examples and parameter guidance. Since an output schema exists, the absence of return value details is acceptable. However, it does not provide guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings like plex_search or plex_get_recommendations, which would improve completeness.

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 description adds extensive meaning beyond the schema. It provides detailed explanations for all 12 parameters, including types, examples, and usage notes. This compensates for the 0% schema description coverage, making parameter usage very clear.

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 performs an advanced search for movies with combined filters, using AND logic. It specifies the resource (films in Plex library) and the action (advanced search with filters). The name itself indicates movies, and the description further distinguishes it from general search tools like plex_search.

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 provides clear usage scenarios through examples, such as searching for unwatched movies with Brad Pitt or well-rated comedies from the last 5 years. However, it does not explicitly state when to avoid this tool in favor of alternatives like plex_get_unwatched or plex_search, which are simpler or broader in scope.

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