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

Annotations already establish read-only, idempotent, non-destructive, closed-world behavior. The description adds genuine behavioral context beyond them: results are restricted to published episodes and are returned in newest-to-oldest order, which affects how an agent consumes the response. It still omits pagination/windowing behavior, which is only partially covered by the schema default.

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 short sentences, zero filler, with purpose and ordering front-loaded ahead of the optional filter. Nothing is redundant.

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?

For a two-parameter, read-only list tool with full annotation coverage and a fully described schema, the description covers purpose, scope, ordering and the optional filter. Only pagination/windowing nuance for the limit parameter is left implicit.

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 description coverage is 100%, so both limit and podcast_slug are already documented, including the default of 20 and the slug example. The description only restates that podcast_slug is an optional series filter, adding no format or syntax detail beyond the schema; baseline 3 applies.

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?

Clear verb+resource ('Lista episódios publicados') with scope (published only) and ordering (newest to oldest). An agent can distinguish it from the singular get_podcast_episode and from list_podcast_series, though it does not name those siblings explicitly.

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?

'Opcionalmente filtra por série' tells the agent the series filter is optional, which implies the intended usage, but there is no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance or routing to sibling tools (e.g., when to use list_podcast_series instead).

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