get_movies_by_id_watching

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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive behavior; the description adds the 'right now' live-snapshot context. It does not mention auth, rate limits, or response shape, but the output schema and annotations cover the safety profile.

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, front-loaded with purpose, and uses a clear Args block. The endpoint line is slightly redundant with the tool name but adds useful URL context.

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 endpoint with output schema and rich annotations, the definition is mostly adequate. It falls short on parameter detail and alternative routing, so an agent may not know exactly what to pass for extended or when to choose a sibling tool.

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 Args section must carry the parameter docs. It usefully notes id is an id/slug, but 'extended: Extended information to include in the response' is a near-tautology and gives no hint of valid values or effect.

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?

Description states a clear action ('Get users watching right now') and the endpoint path pins the resource to a specific movie. It doesn't explicitly name sibling alternatives, but the movies path separates it from shows/users watching endpoints.

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 purpose line and URL imply this is for retrieving current watchers of a given movie, but there is no explicit when-to-use guidance or mention of alternatives such as get_shows_by_id_watching or get_users_by_id_watching. An agent must infer the appropriate context from the endpoint name.

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