Get Transcript

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false. The description adds valuable context that it works on processed media and also returns partial in-progress transcript during live recording (LIVE_TRANSCRIPT state), which goes beyond annotations. No contradictions.

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?

Four sentences, each adding value: first describes output, second adds live transcript behavior, third points to alternative for incremental updates, fourth for subtitles. No fluff, front-loaded with key information.

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 that an output schema exists, the description adequately explains return contents (full transcript with speaker labels and timestamps). It also covers edge case of live state. Complete for a retrieval tool with good annotations.

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?

Only one parameter (mediaId) with schema description 'Unique identifier of the media file'. The tool description does not add further parameter semantics beyond that. Since schema coverage is 100%, baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 it retrieves the full transcript with speaker labels and timestamps. It distinguishes from siblings by noting alternatives for partial live transcripts (get_live_meeting_transcript) and subtitle format (get_captions). The verb 'Retrieve' and resource 'transcript' are specific.

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 tells when to use this tool vs. alternatives: 'To fetch only the new sentences added since your previous call during a live meeting, use get_live_meeting_transcript instead' and 'For subtitle-formatted output, use get_captions instead'. Also mentions update_transcript_speakers for renaming.

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