srgssr_video_get_episodes

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

Beyond annotations (readOnly, idempotent), the description adds behavioral details: episodes are in descending chronological order, pagination uses page_size 1–50, and returned data includes video IDs for the Pillarbox player. This enriches the annotation baseline without contradiction.

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 well-structured with explicit tags (use_case, important_notes, example). Each section adds distinct value, and the first sentence gives the core purpose. No filler or 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?

For a read-only paginated list tool with an output schema, the description covers the essentials: purpose, key return fields, ordering, pagination limits, and a source for valid show_id. It feels complete for an AI agent to invoke 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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by providing a concrete example (business_unit='srf', show_id='tagesschau') and a note on show_id provenance. It mentions pagination range but does not explicitly explain the 'page' parameter; still adequate for basic usage.

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 retrieves the latest episodes of a TV show, listing specific fields (title, date, duration, video ID). This verb+resource combination is specific and distinguishes it from sibling tools like srgssr_video_get_shows and srgssr_audio_get_episodes.

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 includes a use case ('Recherche zu konkreten Sendungsausgaben') and an explicit note that valid show_id comes from srgssr_video_get_shows. This provides context for when to use the tool, though it does not explicitly contrast with audio alternatives.

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