Venice ASR (Speech-to-Text)

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

Without annotations, the description partially discloses behavior (URL fetching, multipart upload, auth support) but omits key details like output format, rate limits, or privacy implications.

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 very concise (2 sentences) but at the cost of omitting essential details about parameters and usage. It is front-loaded but incomplete.

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 4 parameters and no output schema, the description lacks completeness. It does not explain parameter options, expected return values, or provide examples, leaving the agent under-informed.

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 0%, and the description fails to explain any parameter except audio_url by implication. No details on model, language, or response_format choices.

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 tool's purpose ('Transcribe audio') and distinguishes it from siblings like venice_video_transcriptions by specifying it handles audio URLs. It also explains the server-side fetching mechanism.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool over alternatives such as venice_video_transcriptions or venice_tts. The description mentions auth methods but does not provide usage context or exclusions.

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