get_episode

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must indicate side effects and scope. 'Get' and the described contents make it clear this is a read operation returning the full object, but it does not disclose response shape, error behavior, or any permissions needed beyond what the name implies.

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 verb and object, then adds the two most decision-relevant details (overview and linked file). No filler.

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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers the purpose and the key included data. It lacks explicit guidance on when to use it versus related siblings, but this is a minor gap for such a simple operation.

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%; the parameter 'id' is already documented as 'Sonarr episode id'. The description adds no extra parameter semantics, matching the baseline for fully self-documenting schemas.

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 uses a specific verb ('Get'), names the resource ('full episode object'), and specifies distinctive contents (overview plus the linked episode file with quality and media info). This distinguishes it from list_episodes, which lists episodes, and get_episode_file, which targets the file directly.

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 the tool is for retrieving a complete episode aggregate rather than just episode metadata or a separate file. It does not explicitly state when to prefer this over list_episodes or get_episode_file, nor does it mention any exclusions.

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