get_movies_updates_by_start_date

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 read-only nature is covered. The description adds useful behavioral details about pagination: that omitting page/limit applies a low default (often 10) and that limit is capped at the endpoint maximum (often 250), with higher values clamped. This goes beyond the annotations and clarifies response volume behavior.

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 structured with the purpose, endpoint, and parameter list. The pagination paragraph is somewhat verbose but contains valuable behavior. It is front-loaded with the core purpose, and the parameter details are logically placed. It is not overly long given the complexity, though it could be tightened.

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 has an output schema, so return values need not be described. However, the description lacks clarity on the distinction from get_movies_updates_id_by_start_date (which likely returns IDs only), and 'extended' remains undefined. The pagination behavior is well covered, but the overall context is incomplete for an agent to choose this tool confidently among siblings.

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. It explains start_date as a UTC date, and provides extensive pagination semantics for page and limit (defaults, capping). However, the 'extended' parameter is only described as 'Extended information to include in the response,' which is vague and does not specify what values are valid or what information it adds. Partial compensation, but not complete.

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 clearly states 'Get recently updated movies.' and provides the endpoint GET /movies/updates/{start_date}. It is specific about the resource (movies) and action (get updates), distinguishing it from similar tools for shows and people (e.g., get_shows_updates_by_start_date, get_people_updates_by_start_date). The purpose is unambiguous.

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 on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention the related get_movies_updates_id_by_start_date (which likely returns only IDs), nor does it explain the difference between this and the shows/people update endpoints. An agent receives no contextual direction on tool selection.

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