get_transcript

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds value by specifying that transcripts are timestamped with speaker identification and noting the fallback transcription behavior with required dependencies, going beyond annotations.

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?

Six sentences, each adding essential information: main action, output details, comparison with sibling, fallback, and supported formats. No redundant phrases, well-structured and efficient.

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?

With one parameter and no output schema, the description covers purpose, supported inputs, fallback behavior, and usage context. It sufficiently prepares the agent for invocation, though it could mention potential limitations (e.g., language support).

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%, so baseline is 3. The description repeats the URL format but adds examples (Loom share link, direct mp4/webm/mov), providing marginal additional clarity 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 uses a specific verb 'Extract' and resource 'transcript', immediately stating the tool's function. It distinguishes from sibling 'analyze_video' by noting it's faster when only the transcript is needed.

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?

Provides clear context for when to use this tool over 'analyze_video' and lists supported platforms (Loom, direct video URLs). However, it does not explicitly exclude other scenarios or mention alternatives beyond analyze_video.

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