trakt_search

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

The annotations (readOnlyHint: true, destructiveHint: false) already cover safety, but the description adds no behavioral context beyond the basic search action. It does not mention authentication needs, result format, rate limits, or any side effects. The description is not contradictory, but it provides no extra transparency.

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 with zero wasted words. It is front-loaded with the action ('Search') and resource, making it easy to parse quickly.

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?

With no output schema, the description should explain what the tool returns or how results are presented, but it does not. It also fails to provide context about when to choose this over sibling search tools. The description is too minimal to be fully complete for a tool with four parameters and no output schema.

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 all four parameters (query, type, year, limit) having descriptions. The description itself adds no parameter information, so the baseline of 3 applies given the high schema coverage.

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 states a specific verb ('search') and resource ('movies and shows on Trakt.tv'), clearly identifying the tool's function. It does not explicitly distinguish from sibling search tools like radarr_search or sonarr_search, but the mention of 'Trakt.tv' provides a platform-specific differentiator.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not state that this is the preferred tool for searching Trakt content, nor does it mention any exclusions or conditions. The agent is left to infer usage from the name alone.

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