get_library_sections_by_section_id_by_year

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

Annotations already indicate a read-only, idempotent, non-destructive operation, so the safety profile is covered. However, the description adds essentially no behavioral context beyond the endpoint path; it does not explain what the response represents or how the year dimension behaves.

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 very short, front-loads the endpoint path, and includes the argument definition without fluff. It earns its place, though brevity is partly a result of under-specification.

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?

Despite a simple schema and safety annotations, the description is not complete enough for reliable tool selection: an agent cannot determine what 'byYear' returns, how it differs from sibling endpoints, or what scenario calls for this tool. The existence of an output schema does not compensate for missing semantic context.

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%, so the description carries the burden for the single parameter. It does add a minimal gloss: 'section_id: The unique identifier of the library section.' This is enough for a simple integer parameter, though it adds little beyond what the parameter name implies.

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 is essentially 'Get By Year.', which mostly restates the tool name and endpoint path without saying what is actually returned or what 'by year' means in this context. Among many similar get_library_sections_by_section_id_* siblings, it does not distinguish itself semantically.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_library_sections_by_section_id_by_resolution or get_library_sections_by_section_id_movies. The description provides no context, prerequisites, or exclusions.

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