list_livetv_epg_guide

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, openWorldHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the GET semantics are safe and non-mutating. The description adds no additional behavioral context beyond the endpoint, but this is partially acceptable for a zero-parameter read-only operation.

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 very short and front-loaded with the core action. The endpoint line is somewhat redundant given the name and description, but there is no unnecessary prose.

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?

With no parameters and an output schema present, the description burden is reduced. However, it does not clarify what 'EPG Guide' means in practice, what scope it covers, or how it differs from related EPG endpoints, leaving some ambiguity for an agent choosing among siblings.

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?

The tool has zero parameters and schema description coverage is 100%, so there are no parameter details needing compensation. The description does not need to explain parameters because none exist.

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 ('Get EPG Guide') with the endpoint path, making it clear the tool fetches the EPG guide. However, it does not explain what the guide contains or differentiate it from sibling tools like get_livetv_dvrs_by_dvr_id_guide or list_livetv_epg_search.

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 on when to use this tool over alternatives. The sibling list includes several EPG-related tools (lineup, channels, countries, languages, search), but the description doesn't mention any of them or provide selection context.

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