search_transcripts

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, indicating safe read behavior. The description adds no further behavioral traits (e.g., return format, pagination, rate limits). It does not contradict annotations.

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?

Single sentence front-loads the primary action. No redundant information, but could be slightly more structured with bullet points or separation of concerns.

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 tool with 10 parameters, no output schema, and annotations present, the description adequately covers the core functionality but omits return format, ordering, and pagination details. It's minimally sufficient for a qualified agent with good schema descriptions.

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 minimal narrative linking query/terms/matchMode to 'phrases or multiple terms with AND/OR matching' and 'host filters' to hostId/hostName, but does not explain syntax or defaults beyond what schema states.

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 episode transcripts, mentions phrase/term matching with AND/OR logic and host filters. It distinguishes from siblings like get_episode (single episode) and search_episodes (likely episode-level metadata) by focusing on transcript content.

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 implies when to use (for transcript text search) but does not explicitly contrast with alternatives like search_episodes or mention when not to use. No exclusion criteria or usage context beyond the basic function.

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