get_call_transcript

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds meaningful behavioral details: default truncation to 10KB and pagination mechanism to avoid context overflow. This goes beyond annotations, though it stops short of describing the full return schema.

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 concise sentences. The first states purpose; the second provides usage and behavioral caveats. No superfluous content, front-loaded with action.

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 simple read-only tool with excellent annotations and a fully descriptive schema, the description covers purpose, when to use, and pagination behavior. The implied return format (speaker-attributed text) is sufficient given the lack of an output schema.

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 fully documents all three parameters (100% coverage). The description adds value by explaining the rationale for truncation (context overflow prevention) and the pagination workflow, which reinforces the semantics of maxLength and offset.

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 the tool retrieves a raw transcript with speaker-attributed text for a single call. It explicitly distinguishes itself from get_call_summary by specifying use cases (exact quotes vs. understanding content).

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 explicit guidance: 'Only use this when you need exact quotes' and names the preferred alternative (get_call_summary). Also explains when and how to paginate (maxLength/offset) for long transcripts.

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