speech_profiles

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses that the tool lists profiles with timing and attack placement info, implying a read-only operation. However, it does not mention whether the list is exhaustive, any limitations, or the return format, which would be valuable for transparency.

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 sentence, front-loaded with the verb 'List', and contains no redundant words. Every word adds value, efficiently conveying both the action and the content of the result.

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 list tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential return value (list of profiles) and the key fields (duration, ear placement). It could explicitly state that the output is a list of names or that these are available options, but the simplicity of the tool makes this adequate.

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 schema_description_coverage is trivially 100% and no parameter explanation is required. The description adds domain context but doesn't need to describe parameters, fitting the baseline for 0-parameter tools.

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 uses a specific verb 'List' and identifies the resource as 'instrument speech profiles' within the context of '[Stage] block', clearly stating what the tool does. It further details the output content (duration and ear placement), making it unambiguous and distinct from generic list operations.

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 guidance on when to use this tool versus sibling tools like stage_reference or analyze_features. It implies usage in the context of Stage blocks but does not state conditions, exclusions, or alternatives, leaving the agent without direction for tool selection.

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