Search Apple Podcasts for shows

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

Beyond the read-only/idempotent annotations, it discloses that no account is needed, results are storefront-specific, and the tool returns Apple id plus RSS feed URL. This adds meaningful behavioral context and does not contradict any annotation.

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?

Three sentences, each earning its place: search scope, provenance/account requirement, and return-value significance. It is front-loaded with the action and avoids redundant restatement of the title.

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 search tool with no output schema, it tells the agent exactly what comes back and why that matters downstream. With rich annotations and a fully documented schema, nothing critical for selecting or invoking this tool is missing.

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 100%, so the schema already documents all five parameters, including the storefront default, enum meanings, and range. The description adds only a tiny bit of behavioral context, so the 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 and resource: 'Search Apple's podcast catalog for shows by name, topic, host or keyword.' It also clarifies what the tool returns (Apple id and RSS feed URL), making it clearly distinct from episode-focused and library-focused siblings.

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 gives useful context: same index as the Podcasts app, no account needed, results differ by storefront, and returned IDs/feed URLs are what other tools consume. It does not explicitly say 'use search_episodes for episodes' or list exclusions, so it stops short of a 5.

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