List podcast episodes

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

Annotations are rich: readOnlyHint=true, openWorldHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description confirms the read-only listing behavior but adds minimal extra context beyond the annotations. It does not contradict annotations, but it doesn't expand significantly on behavioral traits such as response format or error conditions.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that immediately conveys the action, input, output, and purpose. Every part is necessary and efficiently communicated, with no redundant information.

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?

The description lists the key output fields (title, publish date, episode_guid, audio_url) and explicitly states the purpose, which is sufficient for an agent to use the tool. There is no output schema, so this fills the gap. However, it could mention ordering or pagination defaults, but it's not essential given the straightforward nature of the 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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. While 'feed_url' is implied by the description ('Given a podcast RSS feed or Apple Podcasts show URL'), the 'limit' parameter is not mentioned or explained. The description adds value for 'feed_url' but fails to cover 'limit', leaving the agent to rely solely on schema constraints (min/max/default).

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 uses a specific verb ('list') and resource ('episodes'), specifies the input (podcast RSS feed or Apple Podcasts URL), and states the output fields (title, publish date, etc.). It also explains the purpose: to select which episode to transcribe, distinguishing it from sibling tools like 'transcribe_podcast_feed'.

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 states the input condition ('given a podcast RSS feed or Apple Podcasts show URL') and the intended use case ('pick exactly which one to transcribe'). While it doesn't list exclusions or alternatives, the context is clear as the sibling list includes related tools like 'transcribe_podcast_feed' and 'search_transcript', suggesting when to use this tool for selection.

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