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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so well: it discloses 'metadata only — titles, deks, dates, durations, participant chips and source links — never the digest or transcript.' It also states the ordering ('newest first') and optional narrowing, giving a clear behavioral contract.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the action and key output. Each sentence is informative without fluff, and the pointer to the sibling tool is efficiently integrated.

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 what is returned and what is not, plus points to the content tool. Pagination is left to the schema's offset description, which is acceptable. For a listing tool with optional parameters, this is nearly complete, missing only explicit mention of pagination behavior in prose.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description doesn't add new parameter details beyond the schema, but it reinforces the optional show filter. No extra semantics are needed given the schema's thorough descriptions.

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 function: 'List episodes newest first, optionally narrowed to one show.' It specifies ordering, filtering scope, and explicitly differentiates from content retrieval by noting it returns metadata only and points to bidclub_get_episode for content.

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 an explicit alternative: 'Use bidclub_get_episode for content.' It implies this tool is for browsing metadata rather than retrieving full episodes. Though it doesn't explicitly contrast with search or list_shows, the guidance is clear enough for common use cases.

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