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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is known. The description adds that it returns the most recent episodes, which is useful context, but it does not disclose pagination, ordering, or return format details beyond that.

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, clear sentence with no redundant information. It is appropriately concise and front-loaded.

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?

The tool is simple with one optional parameter and read-only annotations. The description conveys the core function, but the absence of an output schema means the return structure isn't defined. It also doesn't clarify what 'épisodes' are in this context, though that may be inferred from sibling tools.

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 input schema has a single 'limit' parameter with a default of 5, and schema description coverage is 0%. The description does not mention this parameter at all, so it provides no additional meaning beyond the schema's type/default. The agent is left to infer what 'limit' controls.

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 ('affiche' = displays) and resource ('les épisodes les plus récents de Soluble(s)'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools that search, recommend, or find solutions. It answers what the tool does with clarity.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool compared to siblings like search_solutions_concretes or recommend_solutions. It only states its function, leaving the agent to infer the appropriate context.

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