list_voices

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

With no annotations, the description partially fills the gap by mentioning default parameter values and the scale (400+ voices). However, it lacks details on pagination behavior, error handling, or response structure beyond basic summary.

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 concise, front-loads the main action, and uses a simple structure with an Args section. It is efficient without unnecessary words.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity and presence of an output schema, the description covers the essential purpose, parameters, and return summary. It is complete enough for a straightforward list operation.

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?

Despite 0% schema description coverage, the description adds meaning by specifying page and per_page with default values (1 and 100). This is helpful and goes beyond the schema's bare type definitions.

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 clearly states 'List all available voices' and specifies it returns IDs, names, and languages, providing a concise purpose. It distinguishes from sibling tools like search_voices by implying no filtering, but does not explicitly differentiate.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives like search_voices. There is no mention of use cases, prerequisites, or when not to use it.

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