get_series_by_id

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

Annotations already establish readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, and the description adds no behavioral context beyond the verb 'Read' and the GET method. No additional traits like response behavior or error cases are disclosed.

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 'Read Series' followed immediately by the endpoint and a compact Args block. It is structured and free of filler, though the Args section partially duplicates schema information.

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 two-parameter GET with an output schema and safety annotations, the basic invocation details are mostly sufficient. However, it lacks tool-selection guidance and does not define the semantic effect of include_season_images, so it is not fully complete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must compensate, but it only labels id as a path parameter and include_season_images as a query parameter. It does not explain what include_season_images controls or how the default null behaves, leaving meaning to be guessed from the name.

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 opens with 'Read Series' and the GET /api/v3/series/{id} endpoint, clearly identifying the action and resource. It does not explicitly differentiate this from sibling tools like get_series_by_id_folder or list_series, so it misses the top score.

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 provides no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_series or get_series_by_id_folder. It only restates the endpoint and parameters, leaving selection entirely to inference.

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