get_shows_updates_id_by_start_date

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

Annotations already declare the operation as read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive. The description adds valuable behavioral context beyond annotations by explaining pagination defaults, endpoint maximums, and that limit values are clamped rather than rejected.

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 compact and front-loaded with the primary purpose. Each sentence earns its place: the endpoint path, the parameter list, and the pagination behavior note are all relevant without filler.

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 GET endpoint with an output schema, the description covers the endpoint, all parameters, and key behavioral details. A minor gap is that it does not specify the exact date format expected for start_date beyond 'UTC date.'

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 carries the full burden for parameter meaning. It clearly documents start_date as a UTC date, page as the page number, and limit with default behavior, maximum capping, and clamping behavior.

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 opens with 'Get recently updated show Trakt IDs,' which states a specific verb, resource, and output type. This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools that return full update objects or IDs for other media types.

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 conveys clear usage context: call this endpoint with a UTC start_date to retrieve recently updated show IDs. It does not explicitly name alternatives or exclusions, but the ID-focused wording implies when this variant should be chosen over the full-updates sibling.

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