Post Transcript

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

Adds substantial behavioral context beyond the annotations: potential credit consumption, the confirm=true gate, and a clarification that 'read-like POST requests do not publish to social platforms' which usefully reconciles the readOnlyHint=false annotation with expected read-like semantics. Return-shape behavior (null transcript) is also disclosed; 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?

Front-loaded with the core action and return behavior, then credit/confirm constraints. Every sentence carries information, though the url restatement slightly overlaps 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?

With no output schema, the description proactively explains the return values (raw_vtt, transcript, transcriptNotAvailable), which is exactly the missing structured information an agent needs, and it covers the credit/confirmation requirement. Complete for this tool's complexity.

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 coverage is 100%, so the parameters (url, account, confirm, language, cache_max_age) are already fully documented in the schema. The description only restates the url semantics (Reddit post or v.redd.it URL) already present in the schema, adding no new syntax or format detail, so the 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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Gets the transcript from a Reddit video post or direct v.redd.it URL'), scoping it to Reddit/v.redd.it and thus clearly separating it from the many sibling *_transcript tools (tiktok_transcript, youtube_transcript, instagram_transcript, etc.). The added condition 'when Reddit exposes a VTT caption file' further sharpens the purpose.

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?

Gives clear context: it applies to Reddit video posts or direct v.redd.it URLs, requires confirm=true, and consumes potential paid credits. It explains the failure mode (transcript null / transcriptNotAvailable true) rather than routing to an alternative sibling, so the when-not scenarios are covered but no explicit alternative tool is named.

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