grok_tts

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

The description provides no information about side effects, authentication needs, or behavioral traits. Since no annotations exist, the description carries the full burden but only repeats the endpoint path.

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 extremely concise (one sentence) but does not earn its place as it fails to provide necessary details. Conciseness without substance is under-specification.

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 complexity (9 parameters, no schema descriptions, no output schema, no annotations), the description is grossly incomplete. It does not cover required inputs, output format, or any usage context.

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?

With 9 parameters and 0% schema description coverage, the description adds no meaning beyond parameter names. It does not explain what 'input', 'text', 'voice', etc. do or how they relate.

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 'Generate speech through /tts.', which clearly indicates the tool's function as a text-to-speech generator. It distinguishes from sibling tools like grok_chat or grok_image, but is vague about the specific resource or input format.

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 like grok_transcribe (if that transcribes speech) or other audio-related tools. No when-not or prerequisites are mentioned.

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