update_moviefile_editor

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

Annotations already indicate idempotent and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the HTTP method PUT and the endpoint path but does not disclose what the editor endpoint actually changes, such as whether it operates on multiple movie files, which fields are affected, or required permissions.

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 short and front-loaded with the purpose followed by the endpoint and the one argument. It contains no filler, though the terse style leaves out contextual details that could have been included.

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 an open-body editor endpoint, the description relies on the agent to find a 'matching GET' or /schema endpoint without naming it, and it does not clarify the editor's scope relative to update_moviefile_by_id or update_moviefile_bulk. Given the complex nested body and the presence of similar siblings, this leaves a significant gap.

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?

The schema provides only 'body' as an arbitrary object with additionalProperties true and no field descriptions, giving 0% schema description coverage. The description compensates minimally by calling body the request payload and instructing to read the matching GET or /schema endpoint first to discover accepted fields, which is useful for an open body.

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 clear verb and resource ('Update MovieFile'), so an agent knows the action and target. However, it does not differentiate this 'editor' variant from siblings like update_moviefile_by_id or update_moviefile_bulk, so it is not a 5.

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 choose this tool over update_moviefile_by_id, update_moviefile_bulk, or other update tools. The only instruction, to read the matching GET or /schema endpoint first, concerns payload construction rather than tool selection.

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