createVoiceClone

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does add a useful behavior by stating the return value includes training_status, implying asynchronous training. However, it does not explain that training runs in the background, that the clone may not be immediately usable, whether repeated calls overwrite or duplicate, or any authentication or rate-limit implications.

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?

Two concise sentences with no filler. The primary action is front-loaded, and the return behavior is stated in a single follow-up sentence. Every word earns its place.

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?

The description states the return value, which is useful since there is no output schema. But it omits the asynchronous training lifecycle, how to interpret training_status values, and whether the agent should later check listVoiceClones or poll for completion. Given the create-then-train workflow, this is a material gap.

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 already documents most parameters with meaningful descriptions (provider, transcript, owner_email, metadescription), so schema coverage is high. The description adds only the contextual phrase 'training audio URLs,' which aligns with the required voice_clone_training_urls parameter, but does not add significant semantic value beyond the schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Upload training audio URLs and trigger voice cloning.' It clearly identifies this as the creation action and is easily distinguished from the sibling listVoiceClones, which lists existing clones. It also specifies the return value, reinforcing the purpose.

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 usage is implied by the action 'trigger voice cloning' — an agent can infer this tool is for creating a new clone. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use it versus alternatives, no prerequisites, and no mention of 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.