speak

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It states that it broadcasts text via TTS, but does not mention any side effects, return values, or whether it blocks. For a simple TTS tool, this is minimal but adequate, though more detail (e.g., no return value) would improve 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 concise: one sentence stating purpose and one example. It is front-loaded with the core action and usage, with no wasted 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 (one string parameter, no output schema, no annotations), the description adequately covers purpose and usage. It could mention whether the tool returns anything or if it is synchronous, but for a TTS utility this is not critical.

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 input schema has no descriptions, and schema coverage is 0%. The description compensates with a concrete example: speak(text='已打开文件夹'), which demonstrates both the parameter name and expected format. This adds meaning beyond the schema's bare type definition.

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 the tool does TTS (text-to-speech) for reading back results. The verb '播报' (broadcast) is specific and the resource is text. It distinguishes from siblings by its unique purpose of speaking text aloud.

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 phrase '供工具回读结果' indicates when to use: when the tool needs to read back results to the user. It does not explicitly mention alternatives, but the purpose is clear enough for an agent to infer appropriate use.

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