list_voices

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

With no annotations provided, the description must carry the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It discloses the default behavior (short list) and how to get more fields, but does not mention whether the operation is read-only, potential pagination, rate limits, or error conditions. It adds some context but lacks depth about the list's scope or limitations.

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 two concise sentences, with the primary action stated first, followed by a practical usage note. There is no unnecessary wording, making it appropriately sized and front-loaded.

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 parameter and no output schema, the description covers the core purpose and behavior. Combined with the rich schema, the agent has enough to invoke it correctly. It could mention pagination or the fact that it returns all items, but this is not essential for the tool's 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 schema description covers the detail parameter comprehensively, so the baseline is 3. The tool description adds minimal additional meaning ('Lists default short; pass detail=medium/full for more fields') that is largely redundant with the schema. It does not clarify any parameter details beyond what the schema already provides.

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 action (list), the resource (voice profiles), and the scope (all available), and mentions the primary output (IDs). This distinguishes it from other list_* siblings by naming the specific resource.

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 provides usage context about the detail parameter (default short, medium/full for more fields) but does not explicitly state when to use this tool vs alternatives or any exclusions. The unique resource makes usage implied, but there is no explicit guidance on when not to use it or how to choose among similar list tools.

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