get_total_downloadsRetrieve all-time total download counts for a Captivate podcast show or a specific episode using a show ID and optional episode ID, enabling quick performance checks.
All-time total downloads for a show, or for a single episode.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| show_id | Yes | Captivate show ID (from list_shows) | |
| episode_id | No | Captivate episode ID (from list_episodes) |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.1.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
readOnlyHint=true already covers the safety profile, so the description only needs to add context. It adds the all-time scope and the fact that omitting episode_id yields show-level totals, but says nothing about what the returned number represents (platforms, refresh cadence, precision).
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?
A single sentence that front-loads the scope (all-time) and the two aggregation levels. Nothing extraneous.
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?
No output schema exists, so ideally the description would say the response is a single total count, but for a two-parameter read-only metric tool this is nearly complete. Minor gaps around what the count includes remain.
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 baseline would be 3, but the description adds real semantics: episode_id is a narrowing filter and the call aggregates at show level when it is absent. That is meaning beyond the schema's bare 'Captivate episode ID (from list_episodes)'.
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+resource (total downloads) and scopes it to all-time, with the two aggregation levels (show or single episode) named. It implicitly separates itself from get_monthly_downloads and get_average_downloads via 'all-time', but never names those siblings explicitly.
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 'all-time' qualifier hints at when to prefer this over the period-based download tools, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance is given. An agent must infer the choice from the sibling names alone.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.