Record

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, openWorldHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds almost nothing beyond that: it never says where the audio is written, whether a mic/permission is needed, whether it blocks, or what a duration of 0 does. For a capture tool with a live external dependency, that is a substantial gap.

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?

One short sentence, front-loaded with the verb and resource, with no wasted words. It is concise but arguably under-specified rather than tight.

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 and an undocumented optional parameter, the description should explain the return (path, handle, or transcription trigger) and the default/stop behavior. It omits both, leaving an agent unable to predict the result of the call.

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%, so the description must explain the single parameter. 'Specified duration' loosely maps to `seconds`, but it never states units, the default of 0, or that 0 means record until explicitly stopped — the most important semantic of the parameter.

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 and resource ('Record audio') plus its termination condition, which distinguishes it from sibling transcribe/stream tools. It does not explicitly name which sibling to use instead, so it falls short of the top tier.

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?

No guidance on when to use this versus audio_transcriber_initiate_stream or audio_transcriber_stop_stream, which operate in the same domain. The 'or until stopped' clause hints at the stopping mechanism but never says how recording is actually stopped or what prerequisites exist.

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