srgssr_video_get_episodes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds behavioral details: episodes in descending chronological order, pagination with page_size 1–50. No contradictions.

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 very concise: two sentences plus three structured XML tags (use_case, important_notes, example). All information is front-loaded and relevant, with no wasted words.

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 presence of an output schema (not shown) and thorough annotations, the description provides adequate context. It covers the main purpose, ordering, pagination, and a concrete example. The only minor gap is parameter details, but the output schema likely covers return values.

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% with only business_unit described. The description adds an example (business_unit='srf', show_id='tagesschau') and mentions page_size range (1-50) and pagination. It does not explain show_id pattern or page parameter fully, so it partially compensates 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 states the tool fetches the latest episodes of a TV show, listing the returned fields (title, date, duration, video ID). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools like srgssr_video_get_shows and srgssr_video_get_livestreams.

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 use_case tag indicates research on specific show editions. Important_notes describe ordering and pagination. An example is provided. It lacks explicit when-not-to-use or alternative tool names but is clear enough.

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