Fetch detailed movie information using its unique ID, optionally specifying a language, to quickly assess movie metadata for media requests.
Get movie details.
GET /api/v1/movie/{movieId}
Args: movie_id: Path parameter. language: Query parameter.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| language | No | ||
| movie_id | Yes |
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| result | Yes |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v1.0.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the HTTP method and endpoint structure, which is useful, but does not disclose other behavioral details such as localization behavior or how the language parameter affects the response.
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 core statement. The endpoint line and parameter labels are compact, though the Args section adds little beyond the schema.
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 GET with an output schema and safety annotations, the description is mostly adequate. The main gap is the lack of semantic detail for the language parameter, which an agent would need to use it correctly. Otherwise, the endpoint and required parameter are clear.
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 bears the responsibility for explaining parameters. It only labels movie_id as a path parameter and language as a query parameter, which repeats location rather than meaning. It does not explain what values language accepts or what movie_id represents beyond being a path value.
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: 'Get movie details.' It is unambiguous about the operation. However, it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling tools like get_movie_by_movie_id_ratings or get_movie_by_movie_id_similar, so differentiation relies on the tool name.
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?
No guidance is provided about when to use this tool versus alternatives. There is no mention of when to use the base movie details endpoint instead of the ratings, recommendations, or similar endpoints.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.