transcribe_file

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the behavioral disclosure burden. It discloses supported formats, Whisper as the underlying model, and the behavior for long files (async, segment splitting). It does not mention output structure or side effects, but the key operational traits are covered and there is no contradiction with annotations.

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 three sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by format support and targeted usage advice. Every sentence contributes directly to effective tool usage, with no redundant or repetitive content.

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?

The tool has 5 parameters, no output schema, and no annotations, so the description should clarify return values or outcomes. It explains local-file handling and long-file guidance well, but it does not state what the tool returns (e.g., transcript text, task_id for async), which is a gap given the absence of an output schema.

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 schema description coverage is 100%, providing baseline 3. The description adds value by explaining when to use async_mode and how to adjust segment_minutes for 1h+ files, supplementing the schema's parameter descriptions beyond just listing defaults.

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 tool transcribes local audio/video files using Whisper, with a specific verb (transcribe) and resource (local file). It also lists supported formats and distinguishes itself from sibling transcribe_url by emphasizing 'local' file input.

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 gives clear context for when to use this tool (local files, with format support) and provides concrete guidance for long files (use async_mode, adjust segment_minutes). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention the sibling transcribe_url for remote files, so it lacks explicit alternative naming.

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