get_voices

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

No annotations provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses two key behaviors: result truncation to first 100 voices and ordering (private voices first). This adds value beyond a simple 'list voices' statement. However, it does not mention rate limits, authentication, or error handling.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the main action. Every sentence adds value. No redundant or verbose phrasing.

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 tool is simple (0 params, no output schema). The description provides truncation and ordering, but does not explain the return format or fields of each voice object. Without an output schema, this information would help agents parse results. Missing this detail reduces 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?

The schema has no parameters (0 params, 100% coverage). Baseline for 0 params is 4. The description does not need to add parameter info. It neither adds nor detracts from what the schema already conveys.

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 it retrieves a list of available voices from the HeyGen API. The verb 'retrieves' and resource 'list of available voices' are specific. It distinguishes from sibling tools (avatar generation, credits) which have different purposes.

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?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. The sibling tools are sufficiently different that confusion is unlikely, but the description does not clarify usage context, prerequisites, 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.