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

Annotations already declare the tool is not read-only, is idempotent, and is destructive. The description adds useful behavioral context by explaining that omitting season/episode marks the whole show and that watched=false unmarks. It does not add permission, error, or side-effect detail beyond the scope behavior.

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 a single compact paragraph with the core action front-loaded and each sentence carrying a distinct scope rule. There is no redundant restatement of the name or title.

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 mutation tool with rich schema descriptions and annotations, the description supplies the essential invocation matrix for episodes, seasons, whole shows, and unmarking. Schema details cover title ambiguity, item_id addressing, and parameter formats, so no critical gap remains.

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 the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining parameter combinations: season+episode targets one episode, through extends that to everything up to it, season alone marks a whole season, and neither marks the whole show.

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 states a specific verb and resource: marking TV progress at episode, season, whole-show, or unmark scope. It is clear what the tool does, but it does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings such as set_progress or get_show_progress.

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?

It gives clear invocation guidance for each scope: season+episode, through=true, season only, neither, and watched=false. It does not mention when to prefer or avoid this tool versus alternative progress-related siblings.

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