Transcript List

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the transparency burden. It usefully discloses the data source scope, ordering, and filter options, which are meaningful behavioral traits. It stops short of mentioning pagination, default limits, or returned shape, so not fully transparent.

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?

Single sentence with clear front-loading: action, object, scope, ordering, then filters. 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?

Given there is no output schema and no annotations, the description covers the core purpose, sorting, and filter capabilities. However, it omits pagination behavior and any mention of the limit/offset parameters, leaving a gap for a 6-parameter tool with no required fields.

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 description adds meaning for organizer, attendee, and date range filters, helping map to organizerEmail, attendee, and startTimeFrom/startTimeTo beyond the sparse schema. It does not mention limit or offset, and those parameters lack schema descriptions, so coverage remains incomplete.

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 action ('List') and the resource ('previously-persisted Meet transcripts'), and adds a useful scope qualifier ('not live from Google') plus ordering. It is specific, though it does not explicitly call out how it differs from the sibling MeetTranscriptList tool.

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 implies when to use it: for persisted transcripts, not live ones, with optional filters. It does not name alternative tools for live transcripts, retrieval, or search, so the guidance is more implicit than explicit.

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