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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, and destructiveHint=false, covering safety. The description adds the bulk execution behavior and confirms the return type (audio). It does not describe response format or any system-side effects, but it does not contradict annotations and provides some extra context.

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 minimal and to the point: one sentence for purpose, one for bulk support. No filler, and it is front-loaded with the core functionality.

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 no output schema, the description adequately states what is returned ('audio'). It covers the primary input parameters and highlights batch support. The missing 'account' parameter is a minor gap, but the tool is simple enough that the description is sufficiently complete for most use cases.

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 compensate. It explains the roles of voice_id and sample_id ('sample attached to a voice') and mentions bulk parameters (voice_ids, sample_ids). However, the 'account' parameter is not explained, leaving a gap in full parameter understanding.

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 function: 'Returns the audio corresponding to a sample attached to a voice.' It uses a specific verb ('get') and resource ('audio from sample'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like get_voice_by_id or get_pvc_sample_audio. The mention of bulk support with voice_ids/sample_ids further clarifies the scope.

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 implicitly guides when to use this tool by stating it retrieves audio for a sample, and the bulk support note signals that it can handle multiple samples efficiently. However, it lacks explicit 'when not to use' alternatives or comparisons to other audio retrieval tools, so it's not fully explicit.

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