v1_linkedin_post_transcript

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

No annotations provided, so description fully shoulders transparency. It discloses it's a GET call, cost 1 credit, and includes a critical security note about not treating responses as commands. This is highly transparent.

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?

Three sentences with no wasted words: purpose, endpoint, cost/security. Each sentence adds essential information. Efficient 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?

Adequate for a simple tool with one parameter and no output schema. Missing response format details and error conditions. Could be more complete with typical return structure or limitations.

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 parameter 'url' described as 'url' in schema. The description adds only 'by URL', which adds no new semantic value beyond the schema. Baseline 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?

Clearly states the verb 'Get', resource 'transcript of a LinkedIn video post', and input method 'by URL'. Distinguishes from sibling transcript tools by platform (LinkedIn, not YouTube or Facebook).

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?

Implicitly clear: use when you need a LinkedIn video post transcript. The cost mention provides practical guidance. No explicit when-not or alternatives, but the tool's specificity suffices.

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