transcribe_voices

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

Despite no annotations, the description comprehensively discloses behavior: it uses Telegram's built-in transcription, requires Premium, modifies messages.text, affects downstream features (search, embeddings, bursts, topics), and returns a specific object. No annotation contradictions.

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 sentences, no redundancy, front-loaded with action and resource. Every sentence adds necessary information (prerequisite, effect, output).

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 tool with one simple optional parameter and an output schema, the description provides all necessary context: what it does, prerequisites, side effects, and return shape. No gaps.

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 only parameter 'limit' is not mentioned in the description, and schema coverage is 0%. While the parameter is self-explanatory, the description should have clarified its purpose (e.g., limits number of messages to transcribe) to add value beyond the schema.

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 action ('transcribe') and the specific resource ('pending voice/video-note messages'). It distinguishes from sibling tools, which focus on indexing, search, or syncing, not transcription.

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 mentions the requirement for a Premium account and that transcripts are written into messages.text. It implicitly tells when to use (to transcribe pending voice notes), but does not explicitly tell when not to use or provide alternatives.

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