extract_transcript

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It adds a precondition (current class detail view) but does not explicitly state whether the operation is read-only, whether it has side effects, or what happens if the precondition is not met. This lack of transparency is significant for a tool that depends on page state.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that directly states the action and context. It contains no filler or redundant information, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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?

The tool is simple with one optional parameter and no output schema, so the description is mostly adequate. However, it does not clarify what the extracted transcript looks like (e.g., plain text, metadata) or how it relates to save_transcript, leaving minor gaps in completeness.

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 schema covers the only parameter (classNameOrId) with a clear description for labeling the output, so baseline is 3. The tool description adds no further meaning about this parameter, but it does not contradict or duplicate anything, so a neutral 3 is appropriate.

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 verb 'Extract' and the resource 'transcript text from the current class detail view'. It distinguishes the tool from siblings like extract_resources by specifying transcript text, and from save_transcript by focusing on extraction rather than saving.

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 phrase 'from the current class detail view' implicitly tells the agent it must first navigate to that view. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives like extract_resources or save_transcript, nor does it provide exclusions or prerequisites beyond the implied navigation.

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