get_users_by_id_watched_movies

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false, so the description does not need to restate safety. It adds useful behavioral detail about pagination defaults and limit clamping, but leaves 'extended' as merely 'Query parameter' without explaining what behavior it affects. No contradiction with annotations exists.

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, front-loaded with the purpose, and organized into an Args list. It avoids excessive prose, though the 'extended: Query parameter' line is a filler and the endpoint path somewhat duplicates the tool name. Overall it is efficiently structured.

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 presence of an output schema reduces the need to describe return values. The description gives a useful id convention and pagination behavior, but it omits what values 'extended' accepts and provides no orientation about how this endpoint relates to the many watched/history/watchlist sibling tools. Sufficient for a basic call, but not fully complete.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must carry parameter meaning. It provides real semantics for id (slug or 'me'), page (page number), and limit (items per page with default/max behavior), but 'extended: Query parameter' adds no substantive meaning. The description partially compensates for the schema's silence but not fully.

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 watched movies' for a user, and the endpoint clarifies it targets /users/{id}/watched/movies. It is not a tautology and conveys the core purpose, though it does not explicitly distinguish itself from sibling endpoints like history_movies or watched_by_type.

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 such as get_users_by_id_history_movies, get_users_by_id_watched_by_type, or get_users_by_id_watchlist_movies. The only usage hint is that id may be 'me' for the authenticated user, which is parameter guidance rather than tool-selection guidance.

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