podcast_create

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It mentions the return dictionary with operation name for tracking/downloading, hinting at async behavior, but does not explicitly state that the operation is asynchronous or requires polling. It also omits potential side effects or rate limits.

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?

The description is concise, front-loading the purpose and then listing parameters with clear explanations. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy.

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 output schema exists (though not shown), the description adequately covers parameter semantics and return structure. It could be improved by clarifying the async nature and integration with podcast_download, but overall it is sufficiently complete.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains each parameter: text (string or list), title, description, focus, length (SHORT/STANDARD), and language (default en). This adds meaning beyond the schema, though the focus parameter could be clearer.

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 clearly states the tool's purpose: 'Generate a standalone podcast from text (Enterprise only, no notebook needed).' It specifies the verb (generate), the resource (podcast), and the Enterprise constraint, distinguishing it from sibling tools like podcast_download.

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 notes 'Enterprise only' and 'no notebook needed', implying usage conditions, but it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like podcast_download or studio_create. No exclusion criteria are provided.

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