granola_notes_transcript_get

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and openWorldHint, so safety is covered. The description adds genuinely new behavioral context: the tool returns paginated results and each item is a line of speech with speaker and timestamp. It stops short of describing cursor exhaustion/termination semantics, which is the main remaining behavioral unknown.

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?

Three short sentences, zero waste, front-loaded with what the tool does before the when-to-use rule and the return shape. Nothing is padded or repeated from the schema.

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, so the description usefully describes the shape of each returned item (speaker + timestamp line). Combined with the schema's parameter docs, an agent has enough to call it correctly; only pagination termination behavior is left unstated.

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 description coverage is 100%, so cursor, noteId and pageSize are already fully documented in the schema (including the default page size of 50 and the not_ ID format). The description only implies paging and adds no syntax or format detail beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 applies.

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 states a specific verb (read) and resource (meeting transcript), plus the paging scope ('one page at a time'). It also implicitly distinguishes itself from the sibling notes_get by being the paginated path for the same resource.

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?

Explicit routing is given: 'Use this for any long transcript, and whenever notes_get answers 413 TRANSCRIPT_TOO_LARGE.' Both the trigger condition and the alternative tool are named, so the agent does not have to infer when to switch.

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