Podcast Episodes

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

Goes meaningfully beyond the annotations by disclosing that the call may consume paid API credits, that confirm=true is required, and that the read-like POST does not publish to social platforms. These are exactly the behavioral traits annotations cannot express (annotations only say readOnly=false, destructive=false, openWorld=true). It could still say more about pagination termination or failure modes, but this is solid added context.

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?

Three short sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose and then pagination and cost/confirm constraints. No wasted filler, though the final sentence about social publishing is slightly tangential to episode listing.

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 5-param, no-required, no-output-schema tool, the description covers purpose, paging, credit cost, and the confirm gate — the essentials an agent needs to invoke it safely. Missing only explicit sink/alternative routing among the spotify 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?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so id/url/cursor/account/confirm are all documented in structured fields; baseline 3 applies. The description reinforces cursor paging use but adds no format or syntax detail beyond the schema.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: 'Returns episodes for a Spotify podcast.' This clearly distinguishes the episode-listing tool from the sibling spotify_podcast, which presumably surfaces podcast metadata. It stops short of explicitly naming that sibling or its boundary, so it is clear but not maximally differentiating.

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?

Provides useful invocation context (omit cursor for the first page, pass confirm=true for the approved call), but never states when to choose this tool over spotify_podcast or spotify_search. Usage is implied by the resource description rather than laid out as explicit when/when-not guidance.

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