list_voices

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It clearly indicates a read-only listing operation and adds the detail that IDs are returned. While it does not explicitly state 'this is safe' or 'no side effects,' the verb 'list' strongly implies a non-mutating operation, and there are no hidden behaviors expected.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence that conveys the action, target, and output content without extraneous words. Every word contributes value, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 list tool with no parameters and an existing output schema, the description is complete. It tells the agent exactly what the tool does and what data to expect, with no gaps requiring additional explanation.

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 has zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description does not need to explain parameter semantics, and the schema coverage is 100% with no undocumented inputs.

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 action ('List') and the resource ('available Gandr voices'), and specifies that IDs are included. This distinguishes it from sibling tools like 'synthesize' (which generates speech) and 'list_languages' (which lists languages), making the purpose unambiguous.

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 no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor does it mention any exclusions or preconditions. However, the name and context ('list_voices' among siblings) imply it is the tool for retrieving available voices, though this is not explicitly stated.

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