voicebox_retranscribe_capture

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It says 'retranscribe' but fails to explain whether this replaces the existing transcription, creates a new version, or other side effects. Destructive behavior is not addressed, leaving ambiguity.

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 a single sentence that is efficient and to the point. However, it could be better structured with separate sections for behavior and parameters. For a simple tool, it is acceptably concise.

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 the tool's low complexity (one required parameter, output schema exists), the description is still too brief. It omits details like prerequisites (capture must exist and be previously transcribed), return value, or side effects. Adequate but not fully complete.

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 covers the parameter fully (100% coverage) with a basic description. The overall description adds context about 'different Whisper model' but does not elaborate on the capture_id parameter itself. The tool's purpose provides some meaning, but parameter semantics are not enhanced beyond schema.

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 'retranscribe' and the target 'a capture with a different Whisper model'. It distinguishes from siblings like voicebox_transcribe (initial transcription) and voicebox_refine_capture (modifying text), making the specific purpose evident.

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 the tool is used when a different Whisper model is desired, but it does not explicitly state when to use it versus voicebox_transcribe or alternative tools. No exclusions or step-by-step guidance on preconditions are provided.

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