patch_episodes_subtitles

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

The description discloses only that the tool downloads subtitles and provides the PATCH endpoint. It does not describe side effects, whether existing subtitles are replaced, authentication needs, rate limits, or other behavioral nuances. Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and idempotentHint=true, but the description adds no extra context beyond those hints.

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 appropriately short, starts with the core action, and then lists arguments compactly. It has little fluff, though the Args block could have been integrated more elegantly.

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?

Given five required parameters, sibling tools with overlapping purposes, and the absence of usage guidance, the description is too thin. It lacks information about when to use this tool, what effect it has on existing subtitles, and how it differs from related endpoints. The output schema's existence covers return-value details, but the missing operational context remains significant.

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 coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It lists all five parameters with brief labels, adding some meaning like 'Language code2' and 'Forced true/false as string'. However, the labels are minimal and do not explain what 'forced' or 'hi' represent or how the boolean strings should be formed.

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 action, 'Download an episode subtitles', and names the resource as episode subtitles. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from related sibling tools like create_episodes_subtitles or patch_subtitles, and the verb 'download' conflicts slightly with the tool name's 'patch' prefix.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool versus alternatives such as create_episodes_subtitles, delete_episodes_subtitles, or patching subtitles differently. The description only provides the endpoint and arguments, leaving usage context entirely to inference.

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