bvoiz_list_voices

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

No annotations are supplied, so the description carries the full behavioral burden, yet it says nothing about the return shape, default result size, pagination, or whether an API key is required. The only signal is the word 'danh sách', which weakly implies a read-only operation.

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?

A single front-loaded sentence that identifies the resource first and the filters second, with no wasted text. It is arguably under-specified rather than over-long, which is not a conciseness flaw.

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-required-parameter list tool with no output schema and no annotations, the definition is minimally adequate, but it leaves the agent guessing about result volume, pagination, and how to choose between this and bvoiz_search_voices.

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 100% and all five parameters (including enums for gender and provider) are already documented in the schema. The description restates the filter dimensions without adding syntax, defaults, or combination semantics, so the 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 specific verb+resource ('Lấy danh sách các giọng đọc AI của BVoiz') and enumerates the filter dimensions (ngôn ngữ, giới tính, vùng miền, nhà cung cấp). It does not distinguish itself from the sibling bvoiz_search_voices, which appears to overlap in intent.

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 implies a filtered-listing use case but gives no explicit when-to-use/when-not guidance and never names bvoiz_search_voices or bvoiz_get_voice_details as alternatives. An agent must infer the routing decision on its own.

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