get_discover_keyword_by_keyword_id_movies

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior, so the description's safety burden is light. The description adds the HTTP method and endpoint, plus which parameters are path vs query, but it does not disclose additional behavior such as pagination semantics or default language handling. 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 front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by a clear endpoint and parameter list. There is no redundant prose, though the brevity comes at the cost of semantic completeness.

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 simple read-only endpoint with an output schema and safety annotations, the description is serviceable but not complete. It omits how to obtain a valid keyword ID, acceptable language values, page behavior, and any note that page/language are optional, leaving an agent to guess or inspect sibling tools.

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 needed to compensate, but it only labels each parameter as 'Path parameter' or 'Query parameter.' It does not explain what page represents, how language should be formatted, or the meaning of keyword_id beyond its name and location.

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 specific operation: 'Get movies from keyword,' with the resource being movies and the scope being a keyword. This is enough to distinguish it from sibling tools like get_keyword_by_keyword_id (returns keyword details) and genre/language/studio discovery variants, though it does not explicitly say 'associated with a keyword.'

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?

Usage is implied by the endpoint and path parameter: use this when you have a keyword ID and want its movies. However, the description gives no explicit when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives for keyword lookup, and no indication of how to discover valid keyword IDs.

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