get_speech_engine

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, and openWorldHint=true, so the safety profile is fully covered elsewhere. The description adds no behavioral context of its own, such as error behavior for a missing or invalid engine ID.

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 text is short, but it is under-specification rather than conciseness: three words that carry no information beyond the title. There is nothing to front-load because nothing substantive is said.

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 single-parameter read tool the annotations cover safety and the schema covers the parameter, but with no output schema the description could have said what a speech engine record returns. As written it leaves the agent with only the tool name.

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 100% and the single parameter is documented in the schema, including the accepted seng_/agent_ prefix forms. The description contributes nothing beyond the schema, 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 only restates the tool name/title, 'Get Speech Engine'. It does not specify what a speech engine record contains or how retrieval differs from siblings like list_speech_engines, create_speech_engine, update_speech_engine, or delete_speech_engine.

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?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of prerequisites, and no reference to the sibling tools. An agent must infer from the name alone that this fetches one engine by ID rather than listing engines.

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