list_movies_history

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true. The description adds only the endpoint URL and parameter listings, which are technical but not behavioral. It does not disclose pagination defaults, maximum page sizes, ordering, or how history events are defined. Given that annotations cover the safety profile, the description contributes minimal additional behavioral context.

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 statement, the HTTP endpoint, and a precise list of arguments. Information is front-loaded and nothing is redundant. Every element earns its place.

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?

For a read-only list tool with three optional params and an output schema present, the description provides the essential parameter semantics and endpoint. However, it leaves out context about what 'history events' contain or how pagination interacts with the radarrid filter. While not fatal, an agent might benefit from a note that paging is applied across filtered results. The lack of any usage guidance also undermines 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?

Schema coverage is 0%, so the description fully compensates. It explains each parameter: 'start: Paging start integer', 'length: Paging length integer', and 'radarrid: Movie ID'. This gives the agent actionable meaning that the bare schema (which only lists integer types with defaults) does not provide. It is clear enough for a simple paging/filter tool.

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 and resource: 'List movies history events.' It explicitly narrows the scope to movies, distinguishing it from sibling tools like list_episodes_history. This makes the tool's purpose unambiguous without needing to inspect schema or siblings.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. There are many similar list tools (e.g., list_episodes_history, list_movies, list_movies_blacklist) and no mention of scenarios, exclusions, or comparisons. The only hint is the resource name itself, which is not enough to route an agent correctly.

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