akai_narrate

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

Description lacks behavioral details beyond the name. With no annotations, it should disclose traits like whether it's synchronous, required permissions, rate limits, or output behavior, but none are mentioned.

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?

Description is a single, efficient sentence. While concise, it lacks critical details; not overly verbose, but could be restructured to include key info without adding length.

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 TTS tool with tone-awareness and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't specify input format, output, or any constraints, leaving the agent with insufficient information.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage but the parameters are generic (args and stdin). Description adds no specific meaning, failing to clarify what CLI arguments or stdin data are expected for TTS.

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?

Description clearly states it's a text-to-speech synthesis tool that is tone-aware and verified. However, it doesn't differentiate from related siblings like 'akai_tone' or 'akai_speech_loop', which could be confused.

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 on when to use this tool vs alternatives, no when-not or context provided. The generic input schema offers no clues about typical use cases.

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