transcribe_audio

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose the cost ($0.10 per transcription), the model (Deepgram Nova-3), and the URL requirement, but it omits potential rate limits, authentication needs, or the exact output format, leaving gaps in transparency.

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 two sentences long, front-loaded with the core action, and includes the key practical detail of cost. Every sentence contributes value without redundancy.

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?

Given the simple tool with four well-documented parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential context: what it does, the input requirement (public URL), and the cost. It could clarify the return format explicitly, but the phrase 'to text' and the overall simplicity make it reasonably 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 coverage is 100%, with all four parameters (audio_url, diarize, language, punctuate) described in the input schema. The description adds little beyond repeating that a public URL is accepted, so it does not meaningfully enhance parameter understanding 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 begins with a specific verb and resource: 'Transcribe audio to text using Deepgram Nova-3.' It clearly distinguishes this tool from its unrelated siblings (crypto, search, IPFS, etc.), and the purpose is unambiguous.

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 indicates that it accepts a public URL to an audio file and mentions the cost, which implies the primary use case. However, it does not explicitly state when this tool should be used over alternatives, nor does it mention exclusions or prerequisites beyond having a public URL.

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