TMDB MCP Server

TV Details

tv_details

Retrieve comprehensive TV show information using TMDB ID to access details like cast, episodes, ratings, and production data from The Movie Database.

Instructions

Get TV show details by ID

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "tv_id": "<tv_id>"
    },
    "name": "tv_details"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`tv_id`	Yes	TMDB TV show ID

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv1.0.1Apr 21, 2026

TDQS

C2.9/5.0

Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It mentions 'Get' which implies a read-only operation, but doesn't disclose behavioral traits such as rate limits, authentication needs, error handling, or what details are returned (e.g., cast, ratings). For a tool with no annotations, this is a significant gap in transparency.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, efficient sentence with zero waste. It's front-loaded and appropriately sized for a simple tool, making it easy for an agent to parse quickly.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given no annotations and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what 'details' include (e.g., plot, genres, runtime) or the return format, leaving the agent uncertain about the tool's behavior. For a tool with rich sibling context, more completeness is needed.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, with the parameter 'tv_id' documented as 'TMDB TV show ID'. The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, such as format examples or constraints. Baseline 3 is appropriate since the schema does the heavy lifting, but no extra value is added.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Get') and resource ('TV show details'), specifying it's by ID. It distinguishes from siblings like 'search_tv' or 'tv_popular' that don't retrieve by ID, though it doesn't explicitly mention these alternatives. The purpose is specific but could be more differentiated.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'search_tv' for finding IDs or 'tv_similar' for related content. The description implies usage when you have a TV show ID, but it doesn't state prerequisites or exclusions, leaving the agent to infer context.

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