mediathek-mcp

mediathek_programme_detail

Retrieve complete details for a German Mediathek programme by title, including low, standard, and HD video URLs, subtitle URL, and website link; use channel to disambiguate same-named titles.

Instructions

Full detail of one programme: all video URLs (low/standard/HD), subtitle URL and website link. title: exact programme title, e.g. "heute journal vom 8. November 2026 (S2026/E333)". channel: optional, e.g. "ZDF", to disambiguate same-named titles.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "title": "<title>"
    },
    "name": "mediathek_programme_detail"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`title`	Yes
`channel`	No

Output Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`result`	Yes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.1.1Nov 12, 2026

TDQS

A3.6/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full disclosure burden. It usefully describes the payload (three video quality tiers, subtitle URL, website link) and warns that title must be exact, but says nothing about behavior on a non-matching or ambiguous title, whether matching is fuzzy, or whether any error is raised.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The return payload is front-loaded in the first sentence, followed by compact inline documentation of the two parameters. Every sentence carries information, with only a minor awkwardness in mixing prose and parameter notation.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be described, yet the description summarizes them anyway (harmless and mildly helpful). For a simple two-parameter lookup, the only real omission is failure/ambiguity behavior when the title does not match exactly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must define both parameters, and it does: title as the exact programme title with a concrete example format including season/episode notation, and channel as an optional disambiguator with a "ZDF" example. This meaningfully compensates for the empty schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

"Full detail of one programme" gives a specific resource and scope, and the enumeration of returned assets (low/standard/HD video URLs, subtitle URL, website link) makes the tool's output recognizable. It implicitly contrasts with the sibling search/list tools by emphasizing a single programme's full detail, though it does not name them.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies this is the follow-up call once you know a programme's exact title, and it explains that channel disambiguates same-named titles. However, it never states the prerequisite (e.g. obtain the title from mediathek_search_programmes) or what to do when an exact match fails, so usage is only implied.

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

Deploy Server