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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so safety is covered. The description adds behavior beyond that: a bounded 30-day retention window, deterministic newest-first ordering, the enumerated status values, and the pagination chain, which is useful operational 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?

A single dense sentence plus one paging sentence and the endpoint. Scope and sort order are front-loaded, and every clause (returned fields, paging rule, HTTP route) carries information.

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?

With no output schema, the description compensates by enumerating the returned fields (id, status, name, duration, language, failure reason) and the status enum values, and it explains the pagination mechanism. Nothing essential for a correct list call 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% and both parameters (limit with its 1-100 range and default of 20, starting_after with its exclusive/older-than semantics) are already fully documented there. The description's mention of starting_after only restates what the schema says, so baseline 3 applies.

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 ('List transcription jobs') plus the governing scope (last 30 days), sort order (newest first), and the exact fields returned. An agent can distinguish this list operation from revai_get_job, revai_submit_job, and revai_delete_job without opening a schema.

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 clear usage context by explaining the 30-day window, default ordering, and the paging contract (starting_after = previous reply's next_starting_after). It does not explicitly name the alternative for fetching one job or state exclusions, 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.