PodHome MCP Server

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It states the action ('List all registered webhooks') but fails to disclose behavioral traits such as whether this is a read-only operation, if it requires authentication, potential rate limits, or what the output format entails. The description adds minimal context beyond the basic action.

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 appropriately sized and front-loaded, with the core purpose stated first followed by parameter details. Every sentence earns its place by providing essential information without redundancy, making it efficient and well-structured.

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?

Given the tool's low complexity (1 parameter) and the presence of an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. It covers the purpose and parameter semantics but lacks behavioral details that annotations would typically provide. The output schema likely handles return values, so the description's gaps in transparency are partially mitigated, but it remains incomplete for a tool with no annotations.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It adds meaning by explaining that 'show' is 'One of the slugs configured in PODHOME_SHOWS', which clarifies the parameter's purpose and format beyond the schema's basic string type. However, with only one parameter documented, the value is limited but sufficient given the low parameter count.

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 clearly states the verb ('List') and resource ('all registered webhooks for a specific show'), making the purpose unambiguous. It distinguishes from siblings like 'delete_webhook' or 'register_webhook' by specifying listing rather than modification. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from other list tools like 'list_episodes' or 'list_shows' beyond the resource type.

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 implies usage when needing to see webhooks for a show, but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'test_webhook' or 'register_webhook'. It mentions the 'show' parameter context but lacks prerequisites or exclusions, leaving usage context inferred rather than stated.

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