Configure Voice

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

There are no annotations, so the description carries the full burden. It says the tool toggles audio and adjusts speech rate, but it does not disclose whether settings persist, whether permissions are needed, or what side effects occur. The test_phrase behavior is only in the schema, not the description.

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?

One efficient sentence with no fluff. The core actions are front-loaded and every word contributes meaning.

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, low-complexity configuration tool with zero required parameters and no output schema, the description is mostly sufficient. But it lacks context about persistence, prerequisites, or the full role of test_phrase, and no output schema means the agent is given no clue about the result of calling the tool.

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?

Schema description coverage is only 33%, but the description compensates partially by mapping 'toggle on/off' to enabled and 'speech rate in WPM' to words_per_minute. test_phrase is covered by the schema's own description. The added meaning is useful but modest.

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 uses a specific verb ('Toggle'/'adjust') and names the exact resource ('tutor audio' and 'speech rate'). This clearly separates it from siblings like quick_config and run_teaching_command, which are not voice-specific.

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?

Usage is implied: use this when the user wants to enable/disable tutor audio or change speech rate. However, there is no explicit 'when not to use' statement or mention of alternatives like quick_config, leaving some ambiguity.

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