search

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full behavioral burden. It discloses key behavioral traits: title collisions are common, results are candidates, and disambiguation by year and type is required. It does not mention limit behavior or rate limits, but the output schema covers return structure and this is a read-only search operation.

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 tight and front-loaded: a clear one-line purpose, followed by parameter nuanceable, then a concrete caution about ambiguity. Every sentence earns its place without redundancy.

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?

The description is complete for a search tool with an output schema. It explains the input semantics, warns about ambiguity, mandates disambiguation, and routes to resolve_id when appropriate. Nothing essential is missing for correct invocation.

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. It does add meaning for 'query' ('by title') and for 'type' (enumerates values and explains omission behavior). 'limit' is not explicitly described, but its standard meaning and default of 10 make this a minor gap.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Search Simkl by title.' It clearly distinguishes this tool from sibling resolve_id by framing search as title-based lookup rather than external-ID lookup.

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?

It provides explicit usage context: type can be 'movie, tv or anime' or omitted to search everything. It also tells the agent to treat every result as a candidate to disambiguate, never as the final answer, and names resolve_id as the preferred alternative when an external ID is available.

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