list_profiles

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the disclosure burden. It clearly explains that the list includes built-in presets and saved profiles, and describes what each entry contains (name, built-in flag, delivery settings). For a read-only list operation, this is sufficient and transparent.

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 two short sentences, front-loaded with the main verb and resource. Every sentence adds value: one defines the tool, the second explains the output and usage. 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?

For a zero-parameter tool with an output schema (present but not shown), the description provides all necessary context: what is listed, where the data comes from (built-in + saved), and how to use the results. It is complete and self-sufficient.

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 tool takes zero parameters, and the description correctly avoids inventing any. The baseline of 4 applies because there are no parameters to explain.

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 opens with 'List speech profiles' which clearly states the action and resource. It further distinguishes these from voices by noting they are 'built-in delivery presets plus any saved via save_profile.' This separates it from sibling tools like list_voices.

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 explicitly tells the user to use a profile name with generate_speech(profile="<name>"), which clarifies a primary use case. It does not explicitly discuss alternatives, but the context of siblings (e.g., list_voices) and the defined scope makes the intended usage clear enough.

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