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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does so well: it discloses the 90-day window, the 10-per-show cap, the mutable state effect (fetching raises the show's floor, changing the next call's results), the hourly refresh staleness, and credit implications for both this tool and the follow-on get_transcript call. This is far beyond what structured fields provide.

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?

Front-loaded with the core behavior and every subsequent sentence adds non-redundant operational detail (exclusions, credits, refresh cadence). It is dense and quite long for one paragraph, but no sentence is filler.

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 no output schema and no annotations, the description still tells the agent what each item contains (a transcript_url), what is filtered out, the result caps, and the time-lag behavior. Nothing needed to select or correctly interpret this tool 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?

Zero input parameters, so there is nothing to document and the baseline is 4. The description does clarify the implicit scope ('the shows this key follows'), which is useful context even though it isn't a 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?

States a specific verb and resource plus a precise definition of 'new' (episodes from the last 90 days newer than the newest already fetched, capped at 10 per show). This differentiates it cleanly from the sibling list_episodes, which is unlikely to have the same incremental floor semantics.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent to the next action ('Fetch any with get_transcript'), and covers edge cases an agent would otherwise misread: episodes without transcripts are omitted, newly followed shows can return empty until the first hourly poll, and the tool itself is free. When-to-use and what-to-do-next are both stated.

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