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

Description adds 'consumes Wubble requests or credits,' aligning with destructiveHint=true. No further behavioral details (e.g., async processing, rate limits). Adequate but not rich beyond 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 compact sentences, front-loaded with purpose. Every word adds value; no redundancy. Perfectly concise.

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?

Despite an output schema, the description omits essential context like supported audio formats, language, or whether transcription is synchronous. Minimal for a tool with 7 parameters and many 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 86%, so parameters are well-documented in schema. The tool description adds no extra meaning to parameters, meeting the baseline for high coverage.

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 clearly states the tool transcribes Wubble speech, which distinguishes it from siblings like wubble_text_to_speech (generates speech) and wubble_describe_audio (describes audio). However, it is vague about what 'Wubble speech' entails (e.g., language, format).

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?

Only mentions credit consumption but gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like wubble_text_to_speech or wubble_describe_audio. No exclusions or contextual clues for selection.

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