Newest episodes across the index

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

注释已表明这是只读、非破坏性操作，描述在此基础上增加了行为特性：这是实时发布的‘消防水龙头’，可能被自动化信息源主导，因此建议使用 exclude。这些细节超出注释提供的信息，有助于代理正确预期结果。

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?

描述由三句简短句子组成，核心信息前置，随后给出使用建议和工具对比，没有冗余内容。每句都承担有用职责，结构高效。

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?

对于列表型只读工具，描述已包含核心目的、排序方式、与 get_rending 的区别、exclude 的用法及原因。schema 已覆盖 max 和 before 的细节，注释已覆盖安全特征，因此没有影响正确调用的重大遗漏。

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?

输入 schema 已 100% 覆盖参数描述，因此基础得分为 3。描述额外解释了使用 exclude 的动机（高频率自动化信息源会主导结果），为参数提供了结构性背景，超越了 schema 中的字段说明。

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?

明确说明该工具返回索引中所有节目的最新发布剧集，并按最新优先排序。它通过强调‘这是信息洪流，不是热门内容’与 get_trending 区分开，目的清晰且不会被误用。

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?

说明何时使用：获取最新发布内容时使用；并明确指出需要热门程度时应改用 get_current。还说明 exclude 过滤器值得使用，并解释原因为高频率自动化信息源会主导结果，这是明确的可操作指导。

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