bvoiz_search_voices

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It only says the tool searches by keyword and gives examples; it does not state that the operation is read-only, how results are ordered, or whether limits/pagination apply beyond the schema's default.

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 with a compact list of illustrative keywords. It is efficient and easy to parse, with no wasted preamble.

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 two-parameter search tool with full schema coverage, the description is minimally adequate. However, because there are no annotations or output schema, it could have clarified what the search returns or how results are ranked, leaving a gap in contextual completeness.

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%, so both parameters are already documented in the schema. The description adds only example keywords, which overlap with the schema's own examples and do not add deeper semantics for the query or limit parameters.

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 ('Tìm kiếm') and resource ('giọng đọc BVoiz'), and clarifies that search is by smart keyword. It does not explicitly distinguish this from the sibling tool bvoiz_list_voices, so it falls short of a 5.

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 examples ('tin tức', 'kể chuyện đêm khuya', 'quảng cáo') imply how to use the tool, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this search versus bvoiz_list_voices or other sibling tools. Usage is therefore only implied.

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