get_recommendations_by_genre_and_rating

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It correctly discloses that results are filtered by genre and minimum rating, but does not mention the optional content type default or any result ordering/limits.

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 a single, focused sentence with no filler or redundant wording. It front-loads the main action and key filters.

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 the three-parameter schema and sibling tools, the description is mostly complete for selection. The only notable gap is not mentioning the optional contentType parameter in the description, though it is fully documented in the schema.

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 100%: all three parameters have descriptions and two have enums. The tool description adds no extra semantic detail beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score applies.

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?

Description clearly states the verb 'Get' and the resource 'OTT recommendations', with explicit filters for genre and minimum IMDB rating. It distinguishes from the platform/rating sibling but omits the content type filter, which is a parameter.

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 given on when to use this tool versus similar siblings like get_recommendations_by_platform_and_rating or get_recommendations_by_criteria. The intended use is implied but not explicitly contrasted.

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