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

With no annotations, the description fully discloses asynchronous behavior: immediate return of extraction_id, initialization delay up to 2 minutes, extraction duration of 1-7 minutes, result format (cross-validated synthesis plus per-model summaries), API key requirement, and quota consumption. This is highly transparent.

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 appropriately sized, front-loading the primary action and then providing necessary workflow details in a logical sequence. Each sentence earns its place, covering timing, polling instructions, results, auth, and quota without redundant filler.

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 lacking an output schema, the description covers the immediate return value (extraction_id) and directs users to get_extraction for polling. It explains the full lifecycle of the extraction, making it complete for an initiation 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 input schema already provides 100% coverage for both parameters (url and models) with descriptions including defaults and trade-offs. The tool description does not add parameter-specific details beyond what the schema states, so the baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 'Start an AI extraction of a YouTube video, podcast, article, or PDF URL on CoreWise,' identifying the specific action and resource. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools by being the initialization step, while get_extraction polls and get_transcript retrieves transcripts.

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 explicitly instructs to 'poll with get_extraction every 20-30 seconds until status is completed,' naming the sibling tool and defining the workflow. It also mentions API key requirements and quota consumption, giving clear when-to-use context and prerequisites.

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