voice_set_checkpoint

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

The description discloses the behavioral trait that setting a checkpoint advances a read cursor and affects voice_get_new. It also states constraints: 'Must be after the last checkpoint and not exceed the total available text.' However, it does not describe return values or error conditions, relying on the output schema for those.

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 concise: a one-line summary, a two-sentence explanation, and an Args section. No wasted words.

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 the single-parameter scope and presence of an output schema, the description sufficiently covers what the tool does, its constraints, and its interaction with voice_get_new. The parameter constraints are explicit, and the output schema can handle return details.

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?

The schema only provides the parameter name and type. The description adds crucial meaning: 1-indexed, must be after last checkpoint, must not exceed total text. This fully compensates for the schema's 0% description coverage.

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?

States a specific action: 'Set a checkpoint at the given character position.' This clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like voice_get_new or voice_pause by focusing on marking a position in the transcript.

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?

Explains the functional consequence: 'Subsequent calls to voice_get_new will only return text after this position.' This gives clear context for when to use the tool, though it does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusions.

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