get_users_by_id_ratings_movies

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

Annotations already mark the tool readOnly, idempotent, and non-destructive; the description adds meaningful behavior beyond that by documenting pagination defaults, clamping of limit values, and the authenticated-user 'me' option. This context helps an agent anticipate response-volume behavior without contradicting the annotations.

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, front-loaded with the core purpose, and every sentence adds operational value. 'page - The page number to retrieve' is somewhat redundant with its name, but the overall structure is clean and free of 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 read-only endpoint with an output schema and rich pagination notes, the description covers id addressing, pagination clamps, and endpoint routing. It would be more complete with explicit extended-information options and a pointer to sibling rating endpoints, but nothing essential to invoke the tool correctly is missing.

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?

Input schema has 0% description coverage, yet the Args section independently explains all four parameters, including id's slug/'me' semantics and limit clamping. The only weakness is 'extended', which is described generically as 'extended information' with no actual option values.

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 movie ratings' and gives the full GET /users/{id}/ratings/movies endpoint, so the action and resource are clear. It does not explicitly differentiate this from sibling endpoints like get_users_by_id_ratings_shows or get_users_by_id_ratings, so it stops short of a 5.

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 explains that id can be a slug or 'me', and it gives useful pagination behavior, which tells an agent how to call the endpoint. However, it never states when to choose this tool over related rating endpoints or mentions alternatives, so the when-to-use guidance is only implied.

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