resolve_id

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral-disclosure burden. It adds useful non-obvious behavior by explaining the redirect handling ('Reads the 301's Location header without following it') and the TMDB ambiguity refusal, but it does not mention authentication, rate limits, or other potential side effects, so it is not fully transparent.

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 compact and well front-loaded: the one-line purpose comes first, followed by necessary caveats about TMDB IDs and redirect behavior. Each sentence contributes meaning, though 'the cheapest way in' adds only mild informational 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 five optional parameters, no schema descriptions, and no annotations, the description should clarify how to supply mal/imdb/netflix IDs and what happens when multiple IDs are provided. It only covers the TMDB+type scenario, leaving significant input-side gaps; the output schema helps but does not resolve these.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, but it only explains `tmdb` and `type`. The `mal`, `imdb`, and `netflix` parameter formats, mutual exclusivity, and selection precedence are not addressed, leaving most parameters underspecified.

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 action and result: 'Turn an external ID into a Simkl ID -- the cheapest way in.' It identifies a specific verb and resource, but it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling tools such as search or get_library_ids.

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 one concrete usage rule: a TMDB ID requires `type` ('movie' or 'show') because a bare TMDB ID is ambiguous and refused. It implies this is the cheapest resolution path, but it does not explicitly say when to prefer this tool over alternatives or when not to use it.

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