get_transcript

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must bear the full burden. It discloses that transcripts are stored inside the audio file by Apple, adding some context. However, it does not mention prerequisites (e.g., whether all voice memos have transcripts), error behavior, or side effects. The output formats are described but not the underlying data structure.

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?

Two sentences, no filler. The first sentence states the core function, and the second adds key detail about output formats and source. Front-loaded 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?

For a simple tool with two parameters and no output schema, the description covers the main purpose, source, and output formats. It could mention potential failure cases (e.g., no transcript available), but overall it is adequate for agent understanding.

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 adds context about the 'format' parameter values and the default ('text'), which is slightly beyond the schema's enum descriptions. However, it does not explain the 'id' parameter beyond what is in 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 clearly states the tool's action: 'Extract and return the transcript from a voice memo.' It specifies the source (Apple inside the audio file) and three output formats, distinguishing it from siblings like transcribe_memo (which likely generates transcripts) and get_audio (which returns audio).

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies that it works on existing Apple-stored transcripts, but there is no direct guidance excluding transcription generation or when to prefer other tools.

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