list_movies_hot

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description doesn't need to restate safety. It does add some behavioral context beyond the schema: it explains pagination defaults and clamping for 'limit', and it gives detailed semantics for 'watchnow'. However, it omits other behavior such as rate limits, result ordering, or what 'hot' means, so it adds only marginal context.

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 verbose and repetitive: it lists 16 parameters and repeats 'Query parameter.' for at least 8 of them. It does not front-load the most important details; instead it buries useful info like pagination in a long list. It could be condensed significantly without losing value.

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?

Given 16 parameters, no required ones, and an output schema, the description leaves many gaps. The meaning of 'hot' is undefined, many parameters have no semantic description, and there is no guidance on how to combine filters or when this tool is appropriate. The presence of an output schema doesn't offset the lack of parameter and selection context.

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 schema description coverage at 0%, the description must carry the burden. While 'watchnow' and 'limit' receive meaningful explanations, most other parameters are merely listed as 'Query parameter.' with no information about format, allowed values, or semantics. This is insufficient for an agent to construct correct queries without external knowledge.

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 clear verb and resource: 'Get hot movies' and explicitly gives the endpoint 'GET /movies/hot'. However, it does not differentiate from sibling tools like list_movies_popular or list_movies_trending; the term 'hot' is left ambiguous without defining what makes a movie 'hot' versus 'popular' or 'trending'.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings. The description provides no context about scenarios where 'hot' is preferred over 'popular' or 'trending', nor any exclusions. An agent would have to guess based on the name alone.

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