Get a Homeric Atlas episode

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds no behavioral caveats such as pagination, auth requirements, or input resolution behavior—only content details. It does not contradict 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?

Two sentences with no filler. The operation is front-loaded, followed by the returned contents and then the precise use case. Every clause earns its place.

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?

This is a simple retrieval tool with a single required parameter, full schema coverage, and an output schema. The description conveys both the trigger condition and the return contents; nothing needed to call it correctly is missing.

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 100%, with slug and locale already documented in the input schema. The description only repeats the idea of fetching 'by slug' and does not add extra meaning about slug format or locale behavior, so the schema carries the parameter burden.

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 specific verb and resource: 'Get one episode by slug'. It then enumerates the exact contents returned (passage, narrative, competing theories with proponents and sources, confidence rubric, FAQs), which clearly distinguishes it from siblings like list_homeric_episodes and get_homeric_place.

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?

It gives an explicit use case: 'Use this when the question is where an episode took place and who argued for it.' This tells an agent when to reach for it, though it does not explicitly mention alternatives or cases where list_homeric_episodes would be more appropriate, so it stops short of full routing guidance.

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