get_movies_by_id_watchnow_justwatch_links_by_country

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered by structured metadata. The description adds the concrete endpoint shape and the fact that id is a slug, which is useful, but it does not disclose what the response represents or any edge conditions around country values.

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 purpose in the first sentence and the endpoint immediately after. The Args section is compact, though 'Path parameter' is mostly redundant with the endpoint template and could be replaced with more valuable format details.

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?

The tool is a simple two-parameter GET with an output schema and read-only annotations, so much is already covered structurally. However, the description fails to explain what a JustWatch link is, how country should be formatted, or how this differs from the sibling watch-now endpoint, leaving the agent with incomplete selection and invocation information.

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 must compensate, but it provides only minimal parameter information: country is a 'path parameter' and id is 'the id/slug of the resource.' The country parameter's expected format is unspecified, and no additional meaning is given beyond the schema's type and requirement.

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 begins with a clear action and resource: 'Get movie JustWatch links,' and the included endpoint pattern makes the exact scope (per-movie, per-country) explicit. It does not, however, explicitly distinguish this from the closely related sibling get_movies_by_id_watchnow_by_country, leaving some ambiguity about what 'JustWatch links' means versus general watch-now information.

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 gives no guidance on when to choose this tool over alternatives, nor does it mention any related siblings such as get_movies_by_id_watchnow_by_country or the shows/episodes equivalents. An agent is left to infer from the name and endpoint alone. No exclusions, prerequisites, or context-specific use cases are provided.

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