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

Annotations already mark the tool as idempotent and non-destructive. The description goes further by disclosing that full transcripts or quotes are not returned, and that telemetry is recorded for operational reliability – useful behavioral expectations beyond the structured annotations. 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?

Three sentences with no filler. The first sentence front-loads the core action and scope, the second clarifies output limitations, and the third addresses side effects. 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?

With an output schema present and zero required parameters, the description is complete: it states what is searched, what is returned, what is excluded, and the telemetry side effect. An agent has all the context needed to invoke this tool correctly without further inference.

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%, so the schema fully documents all five parameters. The description mentions keyword, topic/category, and date range, which maps to query, category, since, and until, but adds no syntax or format details beyond the schema. Baseline 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 uses a specific verb ('Search') and a specific resource ('Egleze ... public podcast moments'), and further specifies the search dimensions (keyword, category, date range). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like get_episode_summary and list_categories by focusing on moments rather than summaries or catalog listings.

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 clearly implies the intended use: search for moments by keyword, category, and/or date range, with output limited to headlines and summaries. It doesn't explicitly name alternatives or state when not to use it, but the context is clear enough for an agent to select it over siblings.

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