list_transcripts

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 the sorting order and that it lists files from the output directory. It does not mention edge cases (e.g., missing directory) or confirm it is a read-only operation, but the name and action are self-evident.

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 a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core action and includes key details (sorting order). No redundant or unnecessary information.

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?

There is no output schema, and the description does not specify what the return value contains (e.g., filenames, full paths, or metadata). For a list operation, the agent would benefit from knowing the format of the results, especially when no output schema is provided.

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% – both parameters have descriptions that adequately explain their purpose and defaults. The description does not add additional semantic value beyond what the schema provides (e.g., no further detail on how 'limit' truncates the list).

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 action ('list'), the resource ('all available transcripts in the output directory'), and the sorting behavior ('sorted by modification time, newest first'). This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'get_latest_transcript' (returns one) and delete tools.

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 the tool is for browsing all transcripts in order, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like 'get_latest_transcript' for a single result. However, the context is clear enough for differentiation.

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