Search Audio Transcripts

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

No annotations exist, so the description fully bears the behavioral disclosure burden. It does not state whether the tool returns timestamps, snippets, or has prerequisites like video processing status, leaving significant behavioral ambiguity.

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 redundancy, front-loaded with the core action and purpose.

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?

No output schema and no annotations; the description omits what the search returns (timestamps, excerpts) and does not mention any limitations, making it insufficient for an agent to fully understand the tool's capabilities.

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?

All three parameters are documented in the schema (100% coverage), so the description adds only marginal context (e.g., 'useful for finding when topics were discussed'). Baseline 3 is appropriate as the schema already handles parameter details.

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 searches within a specific video's audio transcripts, using the verb 'search' and specific resource 'audio transcripts'. It distinguishes from sibling tools like search_videos or get_transcription by specifying the search scope.

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 a clear use case ('finding when specific topics were discussed') but lacks explicit guidance on when not to use the tool or alternatives (e.g., comparing with get_transcription for full transcript retrieval).

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