export_srt

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

With no annotations provided, the description must fully disclose behavior. It only states the core function without detailing side effects (e.g., file overwrite behavior), resource requirements, supported audio formats, or error conditions. This is minimal disclosure for a file-writing operation.

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 concise, front-loading the core purpose in the first sentence, followed by a parameter list. It avoids fluff, though the parameter list formatting could be slightly improved for readability. Overall efficient but not maximally polished.

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 description covers the basics for using the tool but lacks contextual details like file overwrite behavior, supported audio formats, error handling, or return value description (though output schema exists). Given the presence of an output schema, the description is adequate but not comprehensive for a file-modifying tool.

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 description adds meaning beyond the schema (which has 0% property descriptions) by explaining each parameter's purpose: 'Absolute path', 'Where to save', 'Whisper model size', 'Language code or None for auto-detect', 'Optional vocabulary/style hint'. This provides essential context not available from the schema alone.

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 tool transcribes audio and saves as an SRT subtitle file for import into Resolve. This specific verb+resource combination distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'transcribe_audio' (returns text) and 'transcribe_and_add_subtitles' (directly adds to timeline).

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 implies usage for exporting SRT files but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives. No mention of prerequisites, limitations, or when not to use it. The mention of Resolve import is helpful but insufficient for clear decision-making.

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