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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of disclosing behavior. It clearly states that the tool lists every show (i.e., no filtering) and specifies what data it returns. While it doesn't explicitly say 'read-only,' the verb 'List' strongly implies a non-mutating operation, which is sufficient for this simple listing tool.

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 only two sentences. The first sentence delivers the core action and return fields, and the second sentence provides usage guidance. Every word earns its place; there is no fluff or repetition.

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 tool's simplicity (no parameters, no output schema, no complex behavior), the description fully covers what the tool does, what it returns, and when to use it. No additional context is necessary for an agent to select and invoke this tool correctly.

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?

The tool has zero parameters, so the schema is empty and the baseline is 4. The description adds value by indicating that no parameters are needed ('List every show') and by describing the output fields, which is meaningful context beyond the empty 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 opens with a specific verb ('List') and resource ('every show in the BidClub library'), and enumerates the exact fields returned (id, display name, source language, hosts, source links). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like list_episodes or search_episodes, which focus on episodes rather than shows.

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 explicitly states when to use this tool: 'Start here when you need a show id for the show parameter of the other tools.' This gives the agent a clear trigger condition and positions the tool as the preliminary lookup step before using siblings like bidclub_list_episodes or bidclub_get_episode.

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