List recent TTS clips

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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=true, so the description does not need to cover safety. It adds the account scope and returned fields, and the 'recent' scoping implies time-based ordering. However, it does not mention any additional behavior, such as whether results are limited by default or if there is pagination, beyond what the schema's limit parameter already states.

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 that includes the action, the resource, and a parenthetical list of returned fields. There is no redundancy or unnecessary detail, making it highly efficient.

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 list tool with one optional parameter and read-only annotations, the description is complete enough. It names the resource, scope, and returned fields, and the absence of an output schema means the description does not need to detail return formats. A minor gap is the lack of clarification on the default limit or ordering, but this is acceptable given the simplicity.

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 100% coverage for the single parameter 'limit', which is well-described. The tool description does not add any additional meaning to parameters beyond what the schema already provides, so the baseline score of 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?

The description clearly states the verb 'List', the resource 'recent clips', and the scope 'on the account', along with the specific fields returned (id, status, metadata). This distinguishes it from sibling list tools like wellsaid_list_voices, which focus on different resources.

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 makes the tool's purpose unambiguous: it is for listing clips, not for other actions like generation or combining. However, it does not explicitly name alternatives or provide when-not-to-use guidance, so it falls short of a 5 but is clear enough for an agent.

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