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

The annotations declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is already clear. The description adds that it supports 'batched execution' via voice_ids, which is useful but not extensive. It doesn't mention potential errors, rate limits, or what 'metadata' includes. Given the annotations cover the read-only nature, the description adds some value but could be more revealing.

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: two short paragraphs. The main purpose is stated first, and bulk support is mentioned as an additional note. It's front-loaded and efficient, though it could add more detail without become verbose given the low schema coverage.

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?

The tool is relatively simple: retrieve voice metadata. With annotations indicating read-only and idempotent, and a small parameter set (though 0% schema coverage), the description covers the core function and bulk execution. However, given no output schema and incomplete parameter semantics, it's not fully complete. It's adequate but with gaps.

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. The description implies that voice_id is the main identifier and voice_ids is for batch support, but it doesn't explain the 'account' or 'with_settings' parameters at all. With 0% coverage and 4 parameters, the description provides only partial meaning for two of them. It meets a baseline but doesn't fully clarify all parameters.

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 'Returns metadata about a specific voice', which is a specific verb+resource. It also mentions bulk support for batched execution. However, it does not fully distinguish from siblings like elevenlabs_get_voices (which likely lists voices) or elevenlabs_get_voice_settings, but the 'by_id' in the name and the focus on a specific voice provide reasonable differentiation.

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 does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives. It says 'Get Voice' and 'Bulk support', but there is no guidance on when to use this vs. other voice-related tools like elevenlabs_get_voices or elevenlabs_get_voice_settings. The context is clear (retrieve metadata for a specific voice), but no exclusions or alternative suggestions are provided.

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