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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint true, idempotentHint true, and destructiveHint false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds meaningful behavioral context: it returns episodes in reading order, includes passage and places, and reports locatability confidence. No contradiction with annotations.

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, each earning its place: the first defines the output contents and ordering, the second gives routing guidance. Information is front-loaded and there is zero wasted wording.

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 simple list tool with one optional parameter, an output schema, and safety-covering annotations, the description is fully sufficient. It states exactly what is listed, the ordering, and how to find details, including the alternative for deeper information. Nothing needed to invoke it correctly is missing.

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 100% schema description coverage with its own description and default value. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics, so the baseline of 3 applies; the schema adequately documents the parameter.

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 explicitly states the tool lists every episode of the Iliad and the Odyssey held in the atlas, in reading order, with passage, places, and locatability. This is a specific verb ('list') plus a clear resource and scope, distinguishing it from the sibling get_homeric_episode and list_homeric_places/routes.

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 second sentence provides explicit usage direction: 'Use this to find the episode you want; use `get_homeric_episode` for its theories and sources.' This names the alternative tool and the condition for selecting it, leaving no inference to the agent.

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