search_transcript

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 clearly states what the tool does and what it returns, including timestamps and surrounding context. It does not address edge cases like missing captions or no matches, but for a read-only search tool the core behavior is 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 a single focused sentence that front-loads the action and resource, then states the return value. Every word contributes useful information, with no redundancy or 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?

The tool is simple, the schema covers all parameters, and the description explicitly states the return shape, which matters because there is no output schema. It could be slightly more complete by addressing what happens when no match is found or captions are unavailable, but an agent has enough to invoke it correctly.

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 documents all three parameters completely, including the default for 'lang'. The description adds no additional meaning about how the parameters behave, so the baseline of 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?

The description uses a specific verb ('Search') and a clear resource ('a YouTube video's transcript'), and it states the output ('matching segments with timestamps and surrounding context'). This distinguishes it from siblings like get_transcript or get_clean_transcript, which retrieve whole transcripts rather than search within them.

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 description implies when to use this tool: when you need to find a keyword or phrase within a transcript. However, it does not explicitly contrast it with alternatives or state when not to use it, so the usage guidance is left to inference.

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