search_films

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states case-insensitive substring matching but omits details like result limits, pagination, ordering, or whether the search returns full film objects or summaries.

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?

A single concise sentence that efficiently conveys the tool's purpose and search capabilities with no extraneous words.

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 nature of the tool (one parameter, no nested objects) and the existence of an output schema, the description provides essential information. However, it could be slightly more complete by noting that the search is across multiple fields, which it does.

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 coverage is 0%, but the description explains that the 'query' parameter is searched across title, genre, director, and distributor. This adds significant meaning beyond the bare parameter name in the schema, though it does not mention that the parameter is required (already in 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?

The description clearly states the tool searches films by multiple criteria (title, genre, director, distributor) with case-insensitive substring matching. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_film (specific film), list_films (listing all), and film_history (history) by indicating it's a search across multiple fields.

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?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like list_films or get_film. The description does not mention any prerequisites, limitations, or scenarios where this tool is preferred.

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