list_alttitle

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the HTTP method and endpoint path, but does not disclose additional behavioral details such as filtering semantics, response shape, or pagination. It does not contradict the 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 brief and front-loaded with the core action and endpoint. The Args listing is compact and easy to scan. It earns its place, though it could have used the space to add parameter meaning.

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 low-complexity read endpoint with an output schema and strong annotations, the definition is minimally viable, but it omits practical context such as whether movie_id and movie_metadata_id are mutually exclusive, optional, or AND-filtered. It also fails to distinguish this list operation from get_alttitle_by_id, which is a notable gap given the large sibling set.

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 must compensate, but it only restates the parameter names and marks them as query parameters. It does not explain what each parameter filters by, whether they are independent, or how they interact. The names 'movie_id' and 'movie_metadata_id' carry limited semantic weight on their own.

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 the action ('Read') and the resource ('AlternativeTitle'), and exposes the HTTP endpoint. This is clear enough to identify what the tool does, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from the related get_alttitle_by_id sibling beyond the 'list' naming convention.

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_alttitle_by_id. The description only lists query parameters and provides no context about selection criteria, prerequisites, or typical use cases.

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