voice_clone

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

Annotations indicate openWorldHint: true, and the description adds explicit context about external API calls to ElevenLabs and potential costs. This goes beyond annotations, though some traits like file format requirements are omitted.

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 sentences plus a warning are concise and front-loaded. The warning is clearly separated, but structure could be improved with bullet points or parameter details.

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?

With 3 parameters and no output schema shown, the description lacks necessary details like audio format, length limits, and return value. It is insufficient for proper invocation given the complexity of voice cloning.

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 coverage is 0%, and the description fails to explain what 'files' (paths, URLs?), 'name', or 'description' mean. No parameter details are provided, leaving critical gaps.

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 'Create an instant voice clone of a voice using provided audio files,' specifying the verb and resource. It is distinct from sibling tools like text_to_voice or create_voice_from_preview, though it does not explicitly differentiate.

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 advises to use only when explicitly requested, but it does not provide when-not-to-use guidance or compare to alternative tools like search_voices or text_to_voice.

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