discover_movies

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. While it mentions filtering capabilities, it doesn't disclose important behavioral traits like pagination behavior (implied by 'page' parameter but not explained), rate limits, authentication requirements, or what happens when no filters are applied. The examples help but don't cover operational aspects.

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 efficiently structured in two sentences: first states the core functionality, second provides concrete usage examples. Every word earns its place with zero waste, and it's appropriately front-loaded with the main purpose.

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 9 parameters with full schema coverage but no annotations or output schema, the description provides adequate purpose and examples but lacks behavioral context needed for a discovery tool. It doesn't explain response format, pagination, or error conditions, leaving gaps despite good parameter documentation elsewhere.

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%, so the schema already documents all 9 parameters thoroughly. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema by listing filter categories in general terms but doesn't provide additional semantic context or usage nuances. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema does the heavy lifting.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose as 'Discover movies with advanced filters' and lists specific filter types (genre, language, year range, rating, sorting). It distinguishes from siblings like search_movies (likely keyword-based) and get_movie_details (single movie focus) by emphasizing filtered discovery.

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 provides clear context for when to use this tool ('Perfect for finding movies that match specific criteria') with concrete examples. However, it doesn't explicitly state when NOT to use it or name specific alternatives among siblings (e.g., search_movies vs. discover_movies).

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