list_sync_collection_minimal_episodes

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds the endpoint path and the available_on query parameter, but does not disclose what fields are included in a 'minimal' episode, whether pagination applies, or what the response shape is. With annotations covering the read-only behavior, a 3 is appropriate.

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 short and front-loaded with the main action, but it includes the raw endpoint path and an Args section that merely restates the schema. The endpoint line is redundant with the tool name and the Args section duplicates the input schema. It is concise but not efficiently structured.

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 list tool with an output schema and read-only annotations, the description is incomplete. It does not explain what 'minimal' means, what the available_on filter does, or how this endpoint relates to the many sibling sync-collection tools. An agent would need to inspect the output schema and guess at the semantics of available_on.

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 for the undocumented available_on parameter. It only says 'Query parameter' with no explanation of format, allowed values, or meaning. The parameter name is self-explanatory to a degree, but the description adds no value beyond the schema's property name and type.

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 says 'Get minimal episode collection' and includes the endpoint path, which identifies the resource and verb. However, it does not explain what 'minimal' means or how this differs from sibling tools like list_sync_collection_episodes, list_sync_collection_minimal_movies, and list_sync_collection_minimal_shows. The name and endpoint carry most of the meaning; the description adds little beyond restating them.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The sibling list includes list_sync_collection_episodes, list_sync_collection_minimal_movies, and list_sync_collection_minimal_shows, but the description never distinguishes this tool from them. The only usage hint is the endpoint path, which is not enough to route an agent correctly.

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