Transcribe Audio

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the burden. It does say the output is 'the transcript text' and names the engine, but it doesn't disclose behavior like language auto-detection, supported audio formats, or whether the file is processed locally vs uploaded. Some behavioral info is added beyond the schema, but gaps remain.

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 short sentences with no filler. The core purpose is front-loaded efficiently, though the second sentence 'Returns the transcript text' is somewhat redundant with the verb 'transcribe'.

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 single-parameter tool with complete schema coverage, this is close to complete, but the description omits supported formats or error conditions and doesn't clarify relationship to normalize_audio or summarize_transcript. Given the sibling list includes several process steps, the description is adequate but not fully complete.

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 100% for the single parameter 'filePath' (Absolute path to the audio file). The description adds the engine context but no additional parameter-level detail beyond the schema already provides.

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 the specific verb 'Transcribe' with resource 'audio file' and names the underlying engine (whisper.cpp). It clearly distinguishes from siblings like summarize_transcript or normalize_audio, though it doesn't explicitly name 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?

Implied usage is to convert audio to text, and siblings suggest downstream processing steps, but there is no explicit guidance about when to use this vs normalize_audio or process_recording, nor any prerequisites like file format or size limits.

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