list_genres_tv

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

The annotations already signal readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and non-destructive behavior, so the description only needs to add contextual behavior; it adds 'official TMDB' and the endpoint, but misidentifies the genre type and gives no detail about localization, ordering, or default language behavior. This reduces transparency rather than improving it.

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-loads the purpose, includes the exact endpoint, and uses a clear Args section. It is not bloated, though one of its few content words ('movie') is incorrect.

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?

Although the tool is simple, has an output schema, and carries read-only annotations, the one-paragraph description is still incomplete because it contradicts the TV genre scope and omits the minimal language-parameter semantics an agent would need to call it correctly.

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 input schema documents 'language' as an optional string or null with default null, and the description merely restates it as 'language: Query parameter,' adding only location information. With 0% schema description coverage, the description should specify expected values (e.g., language codes) or how the default behaves, but it does not.

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 list of official TMDB ... genres') and even includes the endpoint, but it says 'movie genres' while the tool name, endpoint (/api/v1/genres/tv), and sibling list_genres_movie all indicate TV genres. This mislabeling makes the tool's actual purpose misleading and harms sibling differentiation.

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 about when to choose this tool over list_genres_movie or other discovery tools. The endpoint path hints at TV genres, but the description contradicts that by saying 'movie genres,' so an agent cannot reliably decide when to use it.

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