get_transcript

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states what the tool does ('fetches'), not behavioral traits like authentication needs, rate limits, error handling, or output format. It doesn't disclose if this is a read-only operation or has side effects, which is a significant gap for a tool with no annotation coverage.

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 a single, clear sentence with zero wasted words. It's front-loaded with the core action and resource, making it highly efficient and easy to parse.

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 no annotations, no output schema, and incomplete parameter documentation (50% coverage), the description is inadequate. It doesn't explain return values, error conditions, or behavioral nuances, leaving significant gaps for a tool that fetches data from an external source like YouTube.

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 description coverage is 50% (only 'url' has a description), and the description adds no parameter-specific information beyond implying a YouTube video URL is needed. It doesn't explain the 'lang' parameter or provide context beyond what the schema minimally offers, so it meets the baseline but doesn't compensate for the coverage gap.

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 action ('fetches') and resource ('plain text transcript of a YouTube video'), making the purpose immediately understandable. However, it doesn't explicitly differentiate from sibling tools like get_timed_transcript, which likely provides timestamped transcripts, so it misses full sibling distinction.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like get_timed_transcript or get_video_info. There's no mention of prerequisites, exclusions, or specific contexts for usage, leaving the agent to infer based on tool names alone.

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