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

With no annotations, the description carries the transparency burden. It discloses important behaviors: large responses are truncated to the newest rows with a note, and mutually exclusive parameters cause an error. It also states 'metadata only', clarifying that full episode content is not returned. This is valuable beyond the schema.

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?

Three concise sentences with no wasted words. The purpose is front-loaded, and each sentence adds critical information: what it is, how to filter, and the truncation caveat.

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 covers the tool's purpose, filtering, error condition, and truncation. Given the simple schema and no output schema, it leaves out only minor details like the exact metadata fields returned and sorting behavior, which are not essential for a basic index tool.

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 100% and both parameters have descriptions. The description adds extra semantics: the mutual exclusivity requirement and the truncation behavior that makes filtering important. This goes beyond the schema's basic parameter definitions.

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 feed index: a one-row-per-episode, metadata-only catalog. It differentiates itself from sibling tools like list_episodes or search_episodes by emphasizing 'slim' and 'metadata only', and mentions the ability to narrow by show or person. However, it does not explicitly contrast with any specific sibling.

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?

Provides explicit usage guidance: narrow with show or person, warns that passing both is an error, and advises filtering rather than paging due to truncation. This gives clear operational context, though it does not name alternative tools or state when not to use this tool.

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