list_episodes

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses one important behavior — it does not return the full audio_url — which is genuinely useful. However, it does not mention other behavioral traits such as sorting, pagination, read-only status, or what happens when the podcast has no episodes.

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 a single short sentence with no filler. It front-loads the core purpose and then adds the key exclusion, earning 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?

The tool is simple and has an output schema, so return-value documentation is covered. However, the description is minimal: it does not define 'recent', mention that both parameters are optional, or provide guidance for choosing among the many sibling tools. It is usable but has clear gaps.

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 0%, so the description must compensate, but it only implicitly maps '指定 podcast' to podcast_id. It does not explain the limit parameter, its meaning, or the defaults. The schema's default values for limit and podcast_id are the only guidance for those parameters.

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 clear action and resource: list recent episodes for a specified podcast. It also adds a distinguishing boundary ('不回傳完整 audio_url'), which helps separate it from download_audio. However, it does not explicitly name sibling alternatives like get_episode, so differentiation is implicit rather than explicit.

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 implies when to use the tool: when you need recent episodes of a podcast and do not need full audio URLs. It does not explicitly state when to prefer get_episode, download_audio, or search_transcripts, leaving the choice to inference.

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