update_episode_by_id

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

Annotations already provide the safety profile (not read-only, not destructive, idempotent). The description adds the PUT method and the fact that the resource's expected fields are discoverable via GET/schema. It does not state whether the update is partial or full replacement, but it does not contradict 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 compact, front-loads the endpoint, and keeps the Args section minimal. The only minor redundancy is 'Update Episode' alongside the endpoint line.

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 PUT-by-id tool with an existing output schema and annotations covering mutability/idempotency, the description is sufficient: it gives the endpoint, path parameter, and a concrete way to discover the body schema. Missing sibling differentiation is a gap, but the call itself can be made correctly with this description.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage and an open body object, the description compensates by telling the agent to fetch the matching GET or /schema endpoint before constructing the payload. It also labels id as a path parameter. This is meaningful guidance for the two required parameters, though it does not enumerate concrete body fields.

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 opens with a clear verb+resource pair ('Update Episode') and gives the exact endpoint PUT /api/v3/episode/{id}, so an agent can tell this updates one episode by path id. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like update_episode_monitor, but the by_id name and endpoint make the target resource unambiguous.

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 a useful precondition: read the matching GET or /schema endpoint first to learn expected body fields. However, it gives no explicit when-to-use versus alternatives or when-not-to-use, so selection among the many update_* siblings is only implied.

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