get_episode_details

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It usefully reveals that output defaults to human prose and mentions key fields, but it does not describe the actual output shape, what 'detailed' or 'json' modes return beyond schema descriptions, or any error/edge-case behavior.

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 with no wasted words. The purpose is front-loaded, the field list is compact, and the important default behavior is called out clearly.

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 read tool with three well-documented parameters, this is mostly adequate. The main gaps are the lack of differentiation from get_episode, no explanation of the tradeoffs between response_format modes, and no output schema or return-shape detail to compensate for the missing output schema.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds a field list and restates the default prose behavior already present in the schema, but it does not add meaningful semantic detail about market or response_format 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?

States a clear verb and resource: 'Fetch full metadata for one episode' with a helpful field list. It is clear on scope (one episode) but does not differentiate itself from the similarly named sibling get_episode, so it cannot earn a 5.

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 description implies when to use it: when you need full metadata for a single episode. However, it gives no explicit guidance about when to prefer this over get_episode or get_several_episodes, and it does not explain when to choose 'concise' vs 'detailed' vs 'json'.

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