set_episode_status

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the burden of explaining side effects. It discloses that the tool mutates episode statuses, triggers Medusa to search episodes, and can converts UNAIRED episodes to WANTED. It does not discuss permissions or reversibility, but the core behavioral side effects are clear.

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 principle operation is stated first, followed by problem scenario and the comparison to the alternative endpoint. Each sentence serves a purpose, and the description is compact enough for quickly consuming.

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 three-param mutation tool with an output schema, the description provides the operation, the exact endpoint, when to use it, and the behavioral mechanism. The schema covers the remaining param details, so agents have enough information to select and invoke the tool correctly.

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 100%, so the schema already documents `status`, `episodes`, and `series_slug`. The description adds use-case context around setting episodes to `wanted`, but does not add parameter-level detail beyond what the schema and default `wanted value already provide. 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 states a specific verb, resource, and endpoint: 'Set episode statuses for a series via PATCH /api/v2/episodes/{series_slug}. It is not a tautology and conveys the operation clearly. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from the sibling force_search, though the use case and endpoint make the role reasonably unambiguous.

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 provides a concrete trigger ('Use when TVDB metadata is out of sync... and Medusa is not downloading episodes that should be available'), giving the agent a strong signal for when to select this tool. It also references an alternative ('internal bulk-update endpoint') and explains why this tool is preferable for changing UNAIRED to WANTED.

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