speech_to_speech

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

The description contradicts the readOnlyHint annotation by stating the tool makes an API call that incurs costs and saves an output file, indicating side effects. This is a severe inconsistency.

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 extremely concise, using two sentences and a cost warning to convey purpose and a key constraint. Every sentence adds value, and the structure is 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?

While an output schema exists, the description lacks details on input audio format, voice_name options, and output specifics. The annotation contradiction further undermines completeness.

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?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description should compensate but only implicitly references input_file_path and output_directory. The voice_name parameter is not explained, leaving the agent unclear about valid values or usage.

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 transforms audio from one voice to another using provided audio files and saves the output. This verb+resource combination effectively distinguishes it from siblings like text_to_speech.

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 includes a cost warning and explicitly advises only using the tool when requested by the user, providing clear usage guidance. It does not, however, mention alternatives 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.