Get transcript

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

Annotations already cover readOnly/idempotent/openWorld, and the description goes beyond them by enumerating the distinct outcome states (transcript_not_ready, 'no transcript: call not placed', call_cancelled) and the source/recorded fields. It also pre-empts a likely false expectation by stating a recorded transcript is not returned.

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?

Front-loads the core purpose and the negative ('not a recording') in the first two sentences, then uses short sentences for each state. Dense with information and mostly waste-free, though the trailing 'may be a separate paid feature later' is speculative roadmap detail rather than call guidance.

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 usefully explains what the result contains and its error/edge states. The remaining gap is the call_id parameter's semantics, which nothing else in the structured data supplies.

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 single required call_id has no description, so the description must compensate. 'For one call' implies the parameter is a call identifier but adds no format, source, or where-to-find-it guidance, leaving the agent to guess acceptable values.

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 (read) and resource (VA wrap-up summary for one call) and explicitly negates the confusable interpretation: 'This is not a recording.' That distinguishes it from a recording/audio retrieval, though it does not explicitly contrast with sibling get_call, which also takes a call_id.

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?

Gives clear conditional context: usable once the call is wrap_up or completed, otherwise transcript_not_ready. It does not, however, route the agent between this and sibling get_call/update_call, leaving the tool-selection question partly to inference.

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