list_show_episodes

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does disclose ordering, fields, response style, and a default limit. But 'Default limit 20' directly conflicts with the schema's max_results default of SPOTIFY_MCP_MAX_ITEMS env or 50, which is materially misleading for an agent relying on the prose.

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 sentences with action and key facts front-loaded, no filler. Every clause adds information about scope, ordering, fields, pagination default, or output style.

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 single-show listing tool, the description covers scope, ordering, fields, and output style, and the schema is rich. It is incomplete because it gives no route to sibling tools, and the default-limit contradiction means an agent cannot confidently infer pagination behavior without checking the 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 schema already documents all five parameters. The description adds no meaningful parameter semantics beyond a redundant and potentially conflicting default-limit note, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 names a concrete resource (one show's episodes), states the ordering (newest-first), and lists the displayed fields (duration, release date), framing it as the browse view for a single podcast. It is clear but does not explicitly differentiate itself from closely related siblings such as get_show_episodes.

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 phrase 'the browse view for a single podcast' implies when the tool is appropriate and loosely separates it from search-oriented tools. However, it never names alternatives or states when not to use it, so the routing decision is only implicit.

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