getClonedVoiceSample

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

Beyond readOnlyHint/openWorldHint, it discloses the auth requirement (API key in the Authorization header), the ownership restriction, and the specific error code for a missing sample. These are exactly the operational traits annotations cannot convey.

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?

Three tight sentences: purpose first, then access constraint, then error/auth conditions. No filler, and the most decision-relevant fact (what it returns) is front-loaded.

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 single-param streaming getter with no output schema, the description covers purpose, ownership, error behavior, and auth. It is nearly complete; only the recovery action for sample_not_ready (regenerate) is unstated.

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% and voice_id is already documented in the schema. The description adds no syntax, format, or constraint detail about the parameter beyond what the schema provides, so baseline 3 applies.

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 precise verb and resource: 'Stream the generated mp3 sample of a cloned voice.' This is clearly distinguishable from siblings like getClonedVoice (metadata) and regenerateClonedVoiceSample (which produces, not fetches, the sample). An agent can route to it without opening the schema.

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?

Gives clear conditions: owner-only access and a 404/sample_not_ready state when no sample exists yet. It does not, however, explicitly route the agent to regenerateClonedVoiceSample when the 404 occurs, so the alternative path is left implicit.

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