Edit Pvc Voice. Edit PVC voice metadata
Bulk support: accepts voice_ids for batched execution.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| name | No | ||
| labels | No | ||
| account | No | ||
| language | No | ||
| voice_id | Yes | ||
| voice_ids | No | ||
| description | No |
Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations include destructiveHint=false and readOnlyHint=false, so the description must clarify mutation effects. It only says 'Edit PVC voice metadata' without mentioning what fields are updatable, whether existing values are overwritten, or any side effects. The bulk support note hints at batch execution but lacks detail on behavior (e.g., partial failures).
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 brief and to the point, with the bulk support note separated. It is compact, but it could be more informative without being verbose.
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 7 parameters, 0% schema coverage, no output schema, and no annotations for safety, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on parameter constraints, required vs optional fields, and any side effects of editing. It does not provide enough context for an agent to safely invoke the tool.
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 0%, so the description must explain parameters. It only mentions voice_ids for bulk support and voice_id implicitly through the schema. The description does not explain 'labels', 'account', 'language', or 'description' semantics.
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 states it edits PVC voice metadata, which is a clear verb+resource. However, it does not distinguish from sibling tools like elevenlabs_edit_pvc_voice_sample or elevenlabs_edit_voice_settings. The phrase 'Edit Pvc Voice' is somewhat redundant with the name.
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 versus alternatives. It does not mention any prerequisites or scenarios. The bulk support note is a feature, not a usage guideline.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.