find_episodes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not specify whether the operation is read-only, any authentication requirements, or rate limits. It only mentions return format ('raw episode rows'), lacking key behavioral traits.

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 at two sentences, front-loading the purpose and filters in the first sentence and usage guidance in the second. No wasted words, though it could be slightly more structured.

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 6 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, the description provides sufficient context for an agent to decide to use the tool. However, it lacks details on return value structure, pagination behavior, and ordering, leaving some gaps for a search tool.

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 50%, with descriptions for since, until, and limit. The description adds meaning for project_ids, keyword, and has_fix by naming them as filters, but provides no additional details like formats or constraints that the schema lacks. It doesn't compensate fully for the missing schema descriptions.

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 performs a structured search for problem-to-fix episodes, listing relevant filters. It distinguishes from siblings by noting it returns raw data rather than narrative and is for when you already know the project.

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 explicitly advises to use this tool 'when you already know the project or want data instead of narrative,' providing clear guidance on when to choose it over sibling tools like search or get_episode. It doesn't detail when not to use, but the context is sufficient.

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