op3_list_episodes

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

Annotations already declare the tool read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful behavioral context: results are newest first, titles are third-party text from the publisher's RSS feed, and the tool is positioned as a prerequisite before episode-level queries. No contradiction with annotations.

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 three sentences with no filler. It front-loads the core behavior, then gives the practical usage guidance and a relevant caveat about title source. Every sentence earns its place.

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 listing tool with rich annotations and a fully documented schema, the description is complete. It states what the output contains, the ordering, the usage purpose, and a data-quality caveat. No output schema exists, but the description sufficiently conveys the expected return shape.

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 parameters identifier, limit, and search are already thoroughly documented. The description adds context about the returned fields and the use case, but it does not add significant parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already provides. 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 ('List') and resource ('a show's episodes'), and specifies the returned fields: OP3 episode ids, titles, and publication dates, ordered newest first. This clearly differentiates it from sibling tools like op3_get_show, which focuses on show-level info rather than episode listing.

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 explicitly tells the agent when to use this tool: 'Use it to find the episode id for a specific episode before asking anything episode-level.' This gives clear context and a prerequisite, though it does not explicitly name alternatives or when-not-to-use conditions relative to sibling tools.

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