transcribe_audio_file

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behaviors. It mentions the API and model, but omits important details such as file size/duration limits, cost implications, whether the file is uploaded, or any side effects. This lack of transparency is a significant gap for a tool that likely involves network calls and data processing.

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 (4 sentences) and well-structured with separate sections for arguments and returns. It avoids unnecessary details but includes a helpful list of supported file types. The use of bullet points and clear headers enhances readability.

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 tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema (which indicates structured return), the description adequately covers the core functionality and parameters. However, it lacks details on error handling, pagination, or additional response fields, leaving gaps for an agent to know what to expect in edge cases.

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 input schema has 0% description coverage, so the description compensates by explaining each parameter's purpose and the default language. However, it does not specify allowed language codes or file path format, leaving some ambiguity.

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 (transcribe), the resource (local audio file), and the specific model (Groq Whisper API whisper-large-v3). It explicitly lists supported file types and distinguishes from sending a voice message by emphasizing local files.

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 specifies to use for local audio file transcription, but does not provide guidance on when not to use it or when to choose the sibling tool 'transcribe_voice_message' instead. The context implies local files, but lacks explicit exclusions or alternatives.

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