get_people_by_id_movies

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. Beyond that, the description adds essentially nothing — there is no mention of pagination, the meaning of 'extended', the return format, or auth requirements. For a data-fetching tool with no output caveats, the description contributes little beyond what annotations provide.

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?

Very short and front-loaded, with the endpoint and args listed compactly. However, it is under-specified to the point of near-tautology for the args section, and the brevity comes at the cost of useful semantics.

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 and only 2 parameters, so the baseline is modest. But with 0% schema coverage, the description fails to explain the 'extended' parameter and does not distinguish the tool from get_people_by_id_shows, leaving real gaps for an agent deciding how to invoke it and which sibling to choose.

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 does not. 'id: The id/slug of the resource' is a near-tautology that adds no value over the schema schema property name, and 'extended: Extended information to include in the response' does not explain what values are accepted or what the extended information is. The agent cannot determine how to set 'extended' correctly.

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 specific verb and resource ('Get movie credits') and the endpoint GET /people/{id}/movies makes the resource unambiguous. However, it does not differentiate this from the sibling tool get_people_by_id_shows, which is the obvious counterpart for show credits.

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 is provided about when to choose this tool over alternatives. The closely-related sibling get_people_by_id_shows exists for show credits but is never mentioned, so an agent gets no direction on which one to pick.

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