Lesson transcript

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful format details (subtitles to Markdown, objectives, paragraph sections), but omits operational behavior such as truncation via maxChars, paragraph selection semantics, and error cases.

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 concise sentences with the core content front-loaded and no wasted wording. The structure moves from what the tool returns to why an agent would use it.

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?

With no output schema, the description does a fair job describing the Markdown structure, but it does not explain maxChars truncation, paragraph-only extraction behavior, or what happens when a lesson has no subtitles. For a four-parameter tool with no output schema, those are meaningful gaps.

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 75%, with course, lesson, and paragraph documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level meaning, and maxChars remains undocumented in both schema and description, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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 resource and output: lesson text from video subtitles, rendered as Markdown with objectives and one section per paragraph. It distinguishes itself from downloading, but does not explicitly differentiate from the sibling get_lesson tool.

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?

It gives clear usage contexts — study, summarize, or quiz — and notes that no download is needed. It still lacks explicit when-not guidance or a direct comparison to get_lesson, so it is clear but not fully routing-aware.

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