crispasr_resolve_model_paths

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full behavioral disclosure burden. It only states that the tool returns recommended paths; it does not disclose whether it scans the local filesystem, requires existing models, makes network calls, has side effects, or what happens if the models directory is missing.

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 a single sentence with no filler and the core purpose is front-loaded. It is concise and readable, though it sacrifices some helpful detail that could have been included without much bloat.

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?

Given the absence of annotations, an output schema, and parameter descriptions, this one-line description is too thin for an agent to use the tool confidently. It leaves unresolved questions about the expected output format, the meaning of 'recommended', and how 'models_dir' affects behavior.

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 0% and the description does not explain the 'models_dir' parameter at all. The parameter name and default value are self-explanatory to a degree, but the description adds no meaning beyond the schema and fails to compensate for the missing schema documentation.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Return recommended local model paths' for 'auto-routed transcription'. It is clear about what the tool does, though it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like crispasr_list_models or crispasr_download_models.

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?

The phrase 'for auto-routed transcription' implies the context in which this tool is relevant, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no when-not-to-use information. Usage is implied rather than stated.

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