APIbase

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

Annotations cover safety (readOnly, non-destructive) and idempotency. The description adds valuable behavioral context by specifying exactly what data is returned (cast, crew, ratings, budget, revenue, etc.), helping the agent determine if this tool satisfies data requirements. No contradictions with annotations.

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?

Single, efficient sentence front-loaded with the verb. The parenthetical field list provides high information density without verbosity. Every element earns its place.

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 2-parameter schema and rich annotations, the tool is well-described. While no output schema exists, the description compensates by enumerating the specific fields returned (cast, crew, budget, etc.), giving agents sufficient context to select the tool appropriately.

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?

With 100% schema description coverage (both 'id' and 'language' are well-documented with examples and defaults), the baseline score is appropriate. The description does not add parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, but none are needed given the comprehensive schema.

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 uses specific verb 'Get' with clear resource 'movie details' and enumerates specific returned fields (cast, crew, trailers, etc.). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'tmdb.movies.search' (which returns lists) and 'tmdb.movies.where_to_watch' (which is narrower in scope).

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 by requiring a TMDB movie ID, but lacks explicit guidance on when to use this versus siblings like 'tmdb.movies.search' (for finding movies by title) or 'tmdb.movies.where_to_watch' (also mentions streaming providers). No 'when-not' or alternative recommendations are provided.

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