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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and idempotentHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context: what fields are returned, the dependency on published digests, and the disambiguation behavior for multi-week episodes.

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 tight sentences with the core output fields first, followed by the scope constraint and optional-parameter guidance. No filler or redundant detail; every 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?

For a simple read-one-resource tool with an output schema, the description covers the necessary scope, return contents, and disambiguation rule. The source of eid is already documented in the schema, so nothing essential is missing for an agent to invoke it correctly.

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% and both parameters already have clear descriptions. The tool description reinforces the digest parameter's purpose ("when an episode spans more than one week"), but this largely repeats what the schema says. It adds some context about scope but does not substantially go beyond the schema.

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?

Title and description together state a specific verb and resource: reading one episode and retrieving its title, show, summary, and full transcript. The scope qualifier "Scoped to episodes referenced by a published digest" distinguishes it clearly from sibling tools like search or list_digest_episodes.

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 gives clear context: the tool is for a single episode that belongs to a published digest, and it explicitly tells when to pass the optional digest parameter (when an episode spans more than one week). It does not name alternatives or exclusions, but the scope is specific enough to guide selection.

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