transcribe_media

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

With no annotations, the description covers key behaviors: writes _transcript.json next to each media file, optionally writes SRT, processes locally, requires a dependency. No contradictions. Minor omission: no statement about whether it is read-only or destructive, but implied to be write.

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 fluff. First sentence covers core function, second covers prerequisites and side effects. Efficient and front-loaded.

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 tool with no output schema, the description explains purpose, behavior, side effects, prerequisites, and interaction with siblings. Could mention error handling, but overall complete.

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 coverage is 100%, but description adds value by explaining why write_srt is useful (plugs into import_srt_markers) and that language auto-detects if omitted. Provides context beyond parameter descriptions.

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 it transcribes each clip's source media with word-level timestamps using faster-whisper, and distinguishes itself from siblings like edit_by_transcript (which uses the transcript) and import_srt_markers (which imports SRT).

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 usage context: requires optional [transcribe] extra, degrades to install hint, and notes that the transcript is reused by edit_by_transcript and remove_filler_words. Could be more explicit about when not to use it, but overall clear.

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