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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and idempotentHint=true, indicating a safe, read-only operation. The description adds little beyond 'by slug', failing to disclose edge cases like invalid slugs, rate limits, or whether the result can be empty. It relies entirely on annotations for safety profile.

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, well-structured sentence with no wasted words. It is front-loaded with the purpose and includes key detail about chapter metadata. Every word earns its place.

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 (one parameter, output schema present, clear annotations), the description is nearly complete. It specifies the return includes chapter metadata, which is helpful. However, it could briefly mention that the tool is idempotent or that slug must be unique per episode for full contextual completeness.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description must explain the slug parameter. It only mentions 'by slug' without defining what a slug is, how to construct it, or its relationship to the episode. The regex pattern and max length are in the schema, but the description adds no semantic value.

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 verb 'Get' and the resource 'episode' along with the specific detail 'its chapter metadata'. It distinguishes this tool from siblings like get_clip or get_flashcards by specifying that it retrieves an episode, not a clip or other entity.

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 does not provide any guidance on when to use this tool versus its siblings. It lacks information about prerequisites, when not to use it, or any context for choosing this tool over alternatives like get_clip or list_episode_clips.

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