Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
Sibyl

Sibyl

by hello-emrah
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
JavaScript
Remote

speak

Generate speech from text via Gemini TTS, saving a WAV file to the output location you specify.

Instructions

Text to speech with Gemini TTS. Saves a WAV to output_path. (Music generation rides with the Live API in a later version.)

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "text": "<text>",
      "output_path": "<output_path>"
    },
    "name": "speak"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
textYes
modelNo
voiceNoPrebuilt voice name, e.g. Kore, Puck, Charon, Aoede.
output_pathYesWhere to save the .wav file.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.1.0

TDQS

C2.9/5.0
Behavior2/5

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavior. It mentions saving a WAV file, but this duplicates the output_path schema description. It does not explain return values, overwrite behavior, authentication needs, or failure modes.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness3/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is short and front-loaded, but the parenthetical note about music generation is a roadmap detail that does not help an agent invoke the tool. It adds noise without practical value.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness2/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a tool with no annotations, no output schema, and partial parameter coverage, the description is insufficient. It omits key operational details such as model behavior, voice selection consequences, and expected response format.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is only 50%, leaving 'text' and 'model' undocumented in the schema. The description does not clarify these parameters, such as supported text formats or model options. The 'voice' parameter has a schema description, but the description adds no extra semantic value.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states 'Text to speech with Gemini TTS' and notes it saves a WAV to output_path. This distinguishes it from sibling tools focused on images, video, research, and search.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No usage guidance is provided about when to choose this tool over siblings or what prerequisites are needed. The description only states what the tool does, not when it should be used.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools