Transcribe Single Reel

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

The description discloses behavior such as downloading the video (implied by keep_video), generating SRT, and returning a dict with fields. It also mentions ctx for progress reporting. However, it does not explain the download process, temporary files, or any rate limits, and the readOnlyHint annotation might seem at odds with file creation, but not enough to call a contradiction.

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 efficiently structured into Args and Returns sections, with the purpose clearly front-loaded. The inclusion of ctx is slightly extraneous but acceptable; overall, it is compact and readable.

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 output schema present, the return value explanation is somewhat redundant. The description covers inputs and outputs but omits prerequisites such as account authorization, privacy settings, or rate limits. It also doesn't clarify what 'etc.' includes or whether transcription requires external services, leaving some gaps for an agent to use it confidently.

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 0%, and the description compensates by explaining reel_url with a full URL example and keep_video with its default. It also documents the internal ctx parameter. This adds meaning beyond the bare schema, though it could provide more details on URL validation or output file naming.

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's function: 'Transcribe a single Instagram reel to SRT.' It uses a specific verb ('transcribe') and resource ('single Instagram reel'), and the 'single' qualifier distinguishes it from sibling tool transcribe_user_reels.

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?

While the description specifies it handles a single reel via reel_url, it does not explicitly mention when to use this versus transcribe_user_reels or other transcription tools. The distinction is implied by 'single' but no alternatives are named or exclusions stated.

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