list_directors

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

With no annotations, the description must fully disclose behavior. It mentions filtering and implies read-only browsing, but omits pagination, max_results limits, ordering, and return fields. This is insufficient for a zero-annotation tool.

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 two concise sentences with no filler. It front-loads the primary purpose and immediately indicates the filtering dimensions.

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 simple parameter structure and absence of annotations and output schema, the description should explain more. It does not mention output format, pagination, or enum meanings, leaving users underinformed.

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?

The description explains that genre and region are filters, adding meaning to two of three parameters. However, it does not clarify the semantic meaning of enum values (e.g., 'mv', 'k-pop') and completely omits max_results. With 0% schema coverage, this leaves significant gaps.

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 identifies the tool as a browse/list operation for the director reference library, with filtering by region or genre. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by focusing on directors and implies a list action, though 'browse' is slightly less specific than 'list'.

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 implies usage for browsing directors but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as get_director for individual details. No exclusions or decision criteria are given.

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