get_movies_by_id_sentiments

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds nothing beyond 'Get movie sentiments' — no mention of what sentiment data is returned or controlled, so it contributes minimal value over the 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?

Extremely concise and front-loaded with the api verb and resource. The structure is clean, though it errs on the side of under-specification rather than genuine leanness.

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?

With only one parameter and a present output schema, the tool is simple enough, but the description is thin — it never explains what 'sentiments' means or what the response contains. Adequate but with clear gaps.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds one useful clarification — that id is 'the id/slug of the resource' — but offers nothing more, leaving the param only marginally better documented than the bare schema.

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-resource pair ('Get movie sentiments') and includes the endpoint path. It is distinguishable from siblings like get_shows_by_id_sentiments by the movie-specific resource, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate in prose.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives, no prerequisites, no exclusions. An agent gets no help deciding between this and the analogous shows/shows-by-id sentiment endpoints.

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