Transcribe a video ad

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

Annotations already cover read-only, idempotent, and non-destructive behavior. The description adds a valuable behavioral detail beyond those annotations: on unsupported backends it explains the limitation rather than failing silently. This is meaningful runtime behavior that an agent could not infer from the schema or annotations alone.

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 compact and front-loaded, stating the core purpose first and then adding the important backend caveat. Every sentence earns its place with no wasted words or redundant restatement of the title.

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 single-parameter tool with rich annotations and an output schema, the description covers the essential context: what it does, what input it needs, and a key behavioral constraint. The only minor gap is that it does not mention any prerequisites for identifying video ads, but this is likely supplied by the library_id semantics and sibling tool context.

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?

The schema already fully describes the single parameter, library_id, with 100% coverage, so the baseline is 3. The description adds no new meaning about the parameter beyond what the schema provides, but it also does not need to given the high schema coverage.

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 function: converting a video ad's spoken script into readable text. It identifies the resource (video ad) and the specific operation (speech-to-text transcription), but it does not explicitly differentiate itself from siblings like view_ad_creative or get_ad beyond the transcription action itself.

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 important backend-specific context: only the scrapecreators backend can perform transcription. However, it does not explain when an agent should choose this tool over siblings or what conditions make transcription appropriate, so usage guidance is only implicit.

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