find_show_by_publisher

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

With no annotations, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden, but it only says it searches and defaults to 10 results. It does not state read-only behavior, return shape, pagination, or market handling, and its 'defaults to 10' claim conflicts with the max_results schema default of env variable or 50.

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 tight sentence with the core action and differentiation front-loaded. It loses a point because the trailing 'Defaults to 10 search results' is inaccurate relative to the schema and therefore does not fully earn its place.

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 simple search tool with fully documented parameters and no output schema, the purpose and key semantic are present. But the default-value contradiction, lack of any mention of what the response contains, and no explicit sibling routing leave gaps an agent would have to resolve elsewhere.

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 baseline is 3; however, the description's only explicit parameter-related claim (defaults to 10) contradicts the max_results property description (default SPOTIFY_MCP_MAX_ITEMS env or 50), making it net misleading rather than additive.

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 states a specific action ('Search the catalog and match shows') with an explicit resource attribute (PUBLISHER/network) and positions it as the 'missing publisher facet on show search,' differentiating it from generic show-search siblings without needing to open schemas.

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?

It clearly frames when this tool applies: when the lookup is by publisher/network, the facet missing from standard show search. It stops short of naming sibling alternatives like search_shows or stating when not to use this tool, so it is clear but not fully explicit.

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