list_transcriptionsRetrieve your account's transcriptions newest first, with optional status filters and cursor-based pagination to browse results page by page.
The account's transcriptions, newest first. Pass the previous page's nextCursor to read on.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| limit | No | Page size. | |
| cursor | No | nextCursor from the previous page. | |
| status | No | The API's filter: all, active (still working), done, error. |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
v0.2.0Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations already declare this is a read-only/open-world operation. The description adds useful behavior: account scope, newest-first ordering, and cursor-based continuation, but it does not explain default status behavior or what the response contains.
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?
Two short sentences, front-loaded with the resource and ordering, followed immediately by the pagination instruction. There is no wasted text.
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?
For a simple read-only list tool with fully documented parameters and annotations covering safety, the description covers scope, ordering, and pagination adequately. It could be slightly more complete by mentioning default filtering or the shape of the paged response, but it is sufficient to invoke the tool correctly.
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 100%, so all three parameters are already documented in the schema. The description reinforces that `cursor` comes from the previous page's `nextCursor`, but adds little beyond the schema for `limit` or `status`.
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 identifies the resource and ordering: the account's transcriptions, newest first. It implies a list operation but does not explicitly contrast itself with sibling `search_transcriptions` or explain whether it returns all statuses by default.
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 provides pagination guidance by saying to pass the previous page's `nextCursor`, which helps continuation. However, it gives no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus `search_transcriptions` or the single-transcription getters.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.