list_episodes

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

The annotation readOnlyHint=true already informs the agent that this is a read-only operation. The description adds 'archived' which explains the state of the episodes being listed. This complements the annotation without contradiction, but does not disclose additional behavioral traits like pagination or performance characteristics.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the action and resource. It is concise with no unnecessary words. However, it could benefit from slightly more structure, such as separating the purpose from the usage context.

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 simple schema (3 optional params) and the readOnly annotation, the description is nearly sufficient. However, it does not mention what the output contains (e.g., episode details or summary) which could be useful for a list tool. Overall, it is adequate for its simplicity.

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 coverage is 100%, so the description does not need to detail parameters. It mentions 'for an agent', which aligns with the agent_id parameter, but does not clarify the project_id parameter beyond the schema. The description adds minimal value beyond the schema.

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 the verb 'List' and resource 'archived episodes', clearly indicating the operation. It also adds context 'for dashboard display', suggesting a specific use case. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from sibling list tools like list_memories, but the resource type is distinct enough.

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 phrase 'for dashboard display' implies a usage context, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., when to use list_memories instead). No negative guidance or prerequisites are provided.

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