create_episodes_by_id_report

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

Annotations already indicate a write operation (readOnlyHint=false) and non-destructive (destructiveHint=false). The description adds the HTTP method and endpoint but nothing else—no authentication, rate limits, side effects, or what the report submission entails. It provides minimal value beyond the 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 brief and structured with an Args section. The endpoint line is redundant with the tool name but not harmful. It is efficient, though the endpoint duplication could be trimmed.

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 write operation with a nested object body, the description is thin. It does not explain what reporting an episode does, what happens on success, or any prerequisites beyond reading the GET/schema. The output schema exists, so return format is covered, but the description lacks essential behavioral context for a mutation tool.

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 schema has zero descriptions, so the description must compensate. It describes 'id' as 'id/slug' and instructs the agent to read the GET or /schema endpoint to understand the body fields. This is useful but does not detail the body structure itself, so it only partially fills the gap.

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 the action ('Report') and the resource ('an episode') clearly, and the noun 'episode' distinguishes it from sibling report tools for movies, shows, lists, etc. However, it does not elaborate on what 'report' means or why one would use it.

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 versus the many sibling report tools. No alternatives, conditions, or exclusions are mentioned. The description is purely functional and does not help an agent decide between this and, say, create_shows_by_id_report.

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