get_average_downloadsCalculate a podcast show's average downloads per interval across its lifetime to benchmark audience growth and compare performance over time.
Average downloads per interval (e.g. per 28 days) over the life of the show.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| show_id | Yes | Captivate show ID (from list_shows) | |
| interval_days | No | Interval length in days (default 28) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
readOnlyHint=true already tells the agent this is a safe read. The description adds useful semantics (it is an average, not a raw count, and the window is lifetime rather than a caller-supplied date range), but says nothing about rounding, zero-download handling, or return shape.
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?
One short sentence with the metric and the averaging window front-loaded. Nothing redundant and nothing padding the definition.
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?
For a two-parameter read tool with a fully documented schema and a readOnly annotation, this is close to sufficient — the only real gap is the absence of any hint about what the response contains or how the average is computed.
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 100%, with both show_id and interval_days documented in the schema including the default of 28. The description's 'e.g. per 28 days' merely echoes that default and adds no new meaning, so baseline 3 applies.
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 metric ('average downloads') with scope ('per interval, over the life of the show'), which implicitly separates it from get_total_downloads and get_monthly_downloads. It stops short of naming those siblings explicitly, so an agent must infer the distinction.
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?
Use is only implied: the 'life of the show' lifetime window and the interval framing hint at when this beats get_total_downloads or get_monthly_downloads, but no alternative is named and no exclusion is stated.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.