get_voice_detail

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, destructiveHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds useful behavioral context beyond those: it is session-scoped (voice must have been returned by list_voices in this session) and it explicitly does not trigger TTS. However, it does not cover rate limits or error behavior.

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?

Two sentences, front-loaded with the core action and scope. Every clause adds information: what metadata, where the ID comes from, and what the tool does not do.

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 one-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description covers purpose, usage context, and the type of metadata returned ('accent and emotion'). It lacks detail on what happens if the voice is not found or not public, but the annotations and schema cover most other needs.

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 description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It provides provenance for the voice_id parameter (it comes from list_voices), which is helpful, but does not describe the expected format or any constraints beyond what the schema's pattern already imposes.

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 states a specific verb ('Read'), resource ('accent and emotion metadata for a public voice'), and scope ('previously returned by list_voices in this session'). It also explicitly distinguishes itself from TTS generation, making it easy to identify among siblings.

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?

It clearly states when to use it: after list_voices, on a public voice returned in the current session. It also provides a when-not condition ('Does not authorize or perform TTS'), but does not name any alternative tools for related lookups.

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