list_transcript_resources

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

No annotations are present, and the description notes that resources are stored transcript files loadable without tokens, which is a useful extra behavior. However, it does not disclose the return format, pagination, read-only nature, or authorization requirements, leaving gaps for a tool with no output schema.

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 focused sentences front-load the primary purpose and add one supporting detail about token-free loading. No filler or redundancy.

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 simple zero-param list operation, the description is workable, but it omits what the returned resource entries look like or how they relate to load_transcript_resource. Given no output schema and no sibling differentiation, a little more detail on the result format or next-step use would be needed for higher completeness.

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 input schema has zero properties, so there are no parameters or defaults for the description to clarify. Baseline for zero-parameter tools is 4, and the description's mention of 'all available' reinforces the query scope, although it adds no parameter-specific detail.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'List all available transcript resources in the system.' This clearly distinguishes the listing tool from sibling tools focused on getting or loading transcripts.

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 some implied context—'stored transcript files that can be loaded without tokens'—but never explicitly contrasts this with sibling tools like get_youtube_transcript or load_transcript_resource. It gives no when/when-not guidance, so an agent must infer that listing is intended for discovery before loading.

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