get_transcript

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

Annotations declare readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=true, and the description explains the write side-effect clearly: 'The transcript is saved locally so search_saved can find it later.' That reconciles the non-read-only annotation with an otherwise retrieval-sounding tool, which is exactly the context an agent needs. It stops short of failure modes (private videos, missing captions, rate limiting).

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, each earning its place: core action first, then accepted inputs, then the persistence side-effect. No filler or repetition of the schema's boolean defaults.

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 no output schema, the description still conveys the return shape (timestamped transcript) and the persistence behavior that affects downstream tools. Missing only what happens when no transcript is available, which matters for an open-world network tool.

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 0%, so the description must carry the load, and it largely does: it enumerates accepted url formats (watch, youtu.be, shorts, embed) and the 11-character id form, and gives lang examples ('en', 'es'). For timestamps it only implies the off-state, so a slight gap remains.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get a YouTube video's transcript') plus the default output shape ('[mm:ss] timestamps by default'). An agent can tell this apart from search_transcript (search within a transcript) and search_saved without opening any schema.

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?

It supplies usage context for inputs (accepted URL forms, video id, lang codes) and hints that the result becomes searchable via search_saved. But it never states when to prefer a sibling such as search_transcript, nor any exclusions like videos without captions.

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