tool_get_voice_info

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

No annotations exist, so the description carries the burden; it clearly indicates a read-only operation through 'Get', 'verify', and 'inspect'. It details the returned metadata fields and provides practical context, though it does not describe failure behavior when the voice does not exist.

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 compact, front-loads the operation and return fields, then adds a single actionable usage sentence. Every sentence contributes value with no redundancy.

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 single-parameter read tool with no output schema, the description is nearly complete: it states the result fields and the recommended invocation scenario. It could mention behavior when the profile does not exist, but an agent can reasonably infer standard error semantics from 'verify a profile exists'.

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 voice_name as 'from list_voices output', and the description adds that the same voice_name will be used with synthesize_speech. Since schema coverage is 100%, a baseline of 3 is appropriate; the description adds usage context but no new parameter format or type details.

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 uses a specific verb and resource: 'Get full metadata of a single saved voice profile' and enumerates the exact fields returned. It clearly distinguishes itself from siblings like list_voices by emphasizing 'single' versus collection-level listing.

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?

It gives an explicit when-to-use scenario: 'verify a profile exists and inspect its reference audio path before calling synthesize_speech.' It does not explicitly name alternatives like list_voices for listing all profiles, but the guidance is concrete enough for an agent to select this tool correctly.

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