get_call_transcript

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses that transcripts are not retroactive, that a 404 has multiple causes, and that account_id auto-resolves. Does not mention rate limits or other potential issues, but for a read operation the key behaviors are covered.

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?

Description is front-loaded with purpose, then prerequisites, then parameter details, then return value. Every sentence adds value, though the warning about a specific date (2026-05-21) may become outdated. Still well-organized.

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 2 parameters fully described, an output schema present (though not shown), and a clear description of the return format (JSON with segments, confidence scores, durations), the description provides sufficient context for the agent to use the tool correctly.

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%, but description fully explains both parameters: call_id (format 'CAL...') and account_id (auto-resolves if omitted). Adds significant meaning beyond the bare schema, making invocation easier.

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?

Clearly states 'Get the AI transcript for a call' – a specific verb and resource. Distinguishes from sibling tools like get_call_recording (recording vs transcript) and get_call (call details). No ambiguity.

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?

Explicitly mentions prerequisites (CallScribe enabled at call time, Premium subscription) and explains failure modes (404 may mean no transcript or plan limitation). While it does not list alternatives, the context of transcript retrieval is well-defined.

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