Skip to main content
Glama

Episodes

episodes
Read-onlyIdempotent

List recent episodes for a podcast by its Podcast Index feed ID. Returns episode title, description, publish date, duration, audio URL, and episode/season numbers. Example: episodes({ feed_id: 920666, max: 10 })

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
maxNoMaximum number of episodes to return (default 10, max 100)
_apiKeyNoOptional — your own Podcast Index credentials as KEY:SECRET for higher limits; omit to use the shared Pipeworx key.
feed_idYesPodcast Index feed ID (from search_podcasts or trending podcasts results)

TDQS

A3.6/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, openWorldHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint=false. The description adds no behavioral traits beyond annotations; it mentions 'recent' but that's data-centric, not behavioral. No contradiction.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two concise sentences plus a clear example. No wasted words, front-loaded with the main purpose.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a list tool without an output schema, the description is fairly complete: it explains the function, returned fields, and includes an example. However, it lacks details on pagination, error handling, or whether episodes are strictly recent or all available.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% with descriptions for all three parameters. The description adds an example call but does not provide semantic value 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.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states 'List recent episodes for a podcast by its Podcast Index feed ID.' It specifies the verb (list), resource (episodes), and identifier (feed ID), and lists returned fields, distinguishing it from siblings like 'get_podcast' and 'search_podcasts'.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explains what the tool does but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives or provide exclusions. The example implies typical usage, but no guidance on when not to use or which sibling to prefer.

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

Try in Browser

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

TDQS

A3.9/5.0
Disambiguation4/5

Most tools have distinct purposes, but ask_pipeworx and ask_pipeworx_grounded overlap (one is grounded), and bet_research/validate_claim/compare_entities/entity_profile all query Pipeworx data with different intents, which could cause confusion.

Naming Consistency4/5

Names are consistently lower_snake_case and mostly follow a verb_noun pattern (e.g., search_podcasts, get_podcast, list_subscriptions). A few compound names like pipeworx_feedback and polymarket_arbitrage deviate slightly but remain readable.

Tool Count2/5

30 tools is excessive for a server named 'Podcastindex'. It aggregates unrelated domains (podcasts, Pipeworx queries, Polymarket, memory, etc.), making it feel like a kitchen sink rather than a focused tool set.

Completeness3/5

For podcasts, the tool set covers search, metadata, episodes, and trending but lacks subscription management. For the broader Pipeworx domain, ask_pipeworx and discover_tools provide wide access, but specific gaps exist (e.g., no direct SEC filing query). Overall, the surface is broad but uneven.