get_transcript

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

With no annotations, the description must carry behavioral disclosure. The verb 'Fetch' conveys a read-only operation and 'including its status if it is still running' hints at asynchronous/polling behavior. However, it does not describe the return structure, error behavior, or auth expectations, so transparency is only partial.

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, front-loaded sentence with no wasted words. It states what is fetched, how it is identified, and the status behavior efficiently.

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 two-parameter fetch tool, the description plus schema covers the main calling pattern. But with no output schema and no annotations, it leaves ambiguity about the exact response shape and how status values behave when the transcript is no longer running.

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 100%, so the parameters are already well documented in the schema: transcript_id is the id from transcribe, and max_characters trims text with a default of 20000. The description adds no extra parameter meaning, so the baseline of 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Fetch a transcript by id.' Adding 'including its status if it is still running' gives a distinctive behavioral detail that separates it from siblings like list_transcripts and get_subtitles.

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 phrase 'by id' implies use when a transcript_id is already available, but there is no explicit guidance on when to prefer this over siblings or when not to use it. The parameter schema's 'Id returned by transcribe' note provides indirect context, but the description itself does not offer alternatives.

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