Set global speech settings

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It explains the effect of each parameter in plain terms (muted mutes/unmutes all speech; focusedOnly restricts to focused pane) and adds a behavioral constraint ('Provide at least one of the two'). It does not discuss persistence or side effects, but for a simple setter this is adequate.

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 sentences, front-loaded with the main purpose, and includes only essential details. Every sentence earns its place with no redundancy.

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 simple with only two boolean parameters fully described in the schema. The description explains the tool's purpose, parameter semantics, and a usage constraint. No output schema is needed. It is complete for an agent to correctly invoke the tool.

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 coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds value by explaining the combined effect of the two booleans and the requirement to provide at least one. This goes beyond the schema's individual parameter descriptions.

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 the tool sets global speech (TTS) settings, using a specific verb ('set') and resource ('global speech settings'). It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like stop_speech and set_talk by focusing on global configuration rather than per-pane or stop actions.

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 provides clear context: it is for adjusting global TTS settings. It includes a usage constraint ('Provide at least one of the two'), but does not explicitly mention when to use this tool instead of alternatives like set_talk or stop_speech, so it falls short of a 5.

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