speech_t2a_async_query

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. It discloses that the tool returns status and optionally a file_id, and that it polls an async task (non-destructive). However, it does not mention behavior for invalid task_id, rate limits, or whether repeated polling is safe. While sufficient for a simple poll, more details would improve transparency.

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?

The description is two sentences and 132 characters. It is front-loaded with the action and resource. Every word is necessary and contributes to understanding. No redundancy or fluff.

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 poll tool with one parameter and no output schema, the description is fairly complete. It explains the purpose, the relationship to speech_t2a_async_create, and what the tool returns. It could mention that this is a polling operation (potentially long-polling) but overall is sufficient.

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 input schema has one parameter 'task_id' with a description 'Returned by speech_t2a_async_create', which fully documents it (100% coverage). The tool description does not add additional meaning beyond the schema. Baseline is 3, and no extra value is provided.

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 the tool polls an async T2A task created by speech_t2a_async_create, specifying the verb 'Poll' and the resource 'async T2A task'. It lists the possible statuses (success, failed, expired, processing) and mentions the file_id on success. This differentiates it from sibling tools like speech_t2a_async_create and speech_t2a_http.

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 explicitly states the prerequisite: the task must be created by speech_t2a_async_create. It implies the tool is for polling after creation, but does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives like speech_t2a_http for synchronous T2A. The context is clear, but lacks exclusions.

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