check_transcription

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It adds value by disclosing that the tool returns 'transcript text and timestamped segments once completed,' which is helpful, but it does not mention behavior for incomplete jobs, error handling, or that it is a read-only polling operation. This leaves some gaps but is minimally adequate.

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 concise two-sentence summary, front-loaded with the primary purpose and followed by a key return-behavior detail. Every word earns its place, with no fluff or repetition.

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 one-parameter tool with no output schema or annotations, the description covers the essential purpose and return content. It does not explain exact statuses or output structure, but given the low complexity, the information is sufficient for selection and invocation.

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% for the only parameter 'jobId,' and the schema description already explains the origin of the value ('Job id returned by transcribe_media'). The tool description adds no further parameter detail, so the baseline of 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?

The description clearly states the tool checks the status of a transcribe_media job, with a specific verb ('check') and resource ('transcribe_media job'), and distinguishes it from sibling check_* tools by naming the exact job type.

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 context for when to use this tool is clear: it is for checking transcription jobs, and the schema parameter description ('Job id returned by transcribe_media') reinforces that it is used after transcribe_media. No exclusions or alternative tools are mentioned, but none are needed given the resource-specific scope.

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