Get TV episode

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

Annotations (readOnlyHint, openWorldHint) already indicate non-destructive and open-ended behavior. Description adds specific output fields and constraints (up to 15 guest stars), providing valuable behavioral details beyond annotations. No contradiction.

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?

Two concise sentences, each serving a clear purpose: first explains functionality and output, second provides guidance for input. No unnecessary words, efficiently front-loaded.

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 simplicity (3 parameters, output schema exists), the description adequately covers the core functionality and return fields. It omits potential edge cases like missing fields or error handling, but these are minor given the openWorldHint and standard API behavior.

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 all three parameters are already well-described in the input schema. The description adds minimal value by linking the 'id' parameter to search_tv. Baseline of 3 is appropriate as description doesn't significantly enhance parameter understanding beyond what the schema provides.

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?

Description clearly specifies the action ('Get one episode of a TV show') and the resource (episode identified by show id, season, episode number). It lists returned fields (overview, air date, etc.) and distinguishes from siblings like get_tv_season and get_tv by focusing on a single episode.

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?

Description tells the user to obtain the show id from search_tv, providing a clear prerequisite. While it doesn't explicitly state when not to use this tool, the context implies it's for individual episode details vs. season-level data. Could be improved by mentioning alternatives like get_tv_season for full season data.

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