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

The annotations already cover readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is established. The description adds valuable behavioral context by disclosing that the tool lists ALL episodes, returns them in reading order, and includes passage, places, and locatability — information not implied by the annotations alone.

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 with no filler. The first sentence states scope and output content; the second sentence gives routing guidance to the sibling tool. All information is front-loaded and each sentence 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 this is a simple read-only list tool with one optional parameter and an output schema, the description fully covers what an agent needs to know to select and invoke it correctly. It explains scope, ordering, content, and the path to more detailed episode information.

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 only parameter, `locale`, has full schema coverage (100%) with a clear description and an enum of allowed values. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, but the schema already carries the full meaning, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 ('List'), a clear resource ('every episode of the Iliad and the Odyssey held in the atlas'), and the exact attributes returned (passage, places, locatability). It also distinguishes itself from the sibling `get_homeric_episode` by framing this as the episode-finding tool rather than the deep-dive tool.

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 says 'Use this to find the episode you want' and directs the agent to `get_homeric_episode` for theories and sources. This gives a clear when-to-use and points to the relevant alternative without ambiguity.

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