create_providers_movies

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

Annotations already indicate the operation is not read-only, not destructive, and idempotent. The description adds that this is a manual download and that subtitle IDs come from a GET request, but it does not disclose side effects such as where the subtitle is stored or whether provider configuration is required. No contradiction with annotations.

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 compact and well-structured: a one-line purpose, the endpoint, and a bullet-style Args list. Every line contributes useful information with no filler.

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?

All required parameters are documented and an output schema exists, so the description is largely sufficient for calling the tool. It could be slightly stronger by noting where provider names come from or how to obtain subtitle IDs, but 'as returned by GET' provides a reasonable pointer.

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%, but the description explains all six parameters, including allowed values for hi, forced, and original_format, and clarifies that subtitle is an ID returned by GET. This fully compensates for the schema's lack of descriptions.

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 ('Manually download') and the resource ('movie subtitles'), with an explicit POST endpoint. It is understandable and distinct from most siblings, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with create_movies_subtitles or list_providers_movies.

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 word 'Manually' hints at when to use it, but the description gives no explicit guidance about when to choose this over create_movies_subtitles or how to prepare provider/subtitle data. No alternatives or exclusions are mentioned.

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