list_recordings

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that transcription state is included in the result, but says nothing about read-only safety, ordering (how 'latest' is determined), pagination beyond the limit, or whether all recordings or only recent ones are returned.

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?

It is a single short sentence with no waste, but it is under-specified rather than efficient. The sentence leads with the resource rather than an action, so front-loading is weak.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values need not be explained. For a zero-required-parameter listing tool, the description's one piece of added information (transcription state is included) is close to sufficient, though it omits the limit behavior and the 'latest' ordering semantics.

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 0% for the single `limit` parameter, and the description never mentions it. The agent cannot learn the default (10), maximum, or what happens if it is omitted from the description or 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 names the resource (recordings) and notes it returns the latest ones along with their transcription state, which is informative. But it is a bare noun phrase with no verb (list/retrieve) and no scope qualifiers, so it only vaguely signals the operation.

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?

There is no indication of when to use this versus siblings like recording_status, get_transcript, or transcribe_recording. An agent must infer from the name alone that this is the discovery/listing entry point.

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