clone_voice

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

Describes the cloning process and the effect of 'remove_background_noise', but does not disclose side effects, authorization needs, or error conditions. No annotations to supplement, so description carries full burden.

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?

Compact description: one introductory sentence, then an Args list, and a return statement. Every sentence adds value; no fluff or repetition.

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?

Covers input, optional parameters, output (returns id as JSON). Output schema is provided, so return details are sufficient. Lacks error handling or invalid input behavior, but given parameter count and no annotations, it is largely complete.

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?

All five parameters are explained in the description beyond the schema (which has 0% coverage). Adds meaning like 'clean sample recordings' for audio_file_paths and 'clean the samples before cloning' for remove_background_noise. Missing format details for labels but overall effective.

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?

Clearly states the tool creates a new voice from audio samples, using the verb 'create' and resource 'voice'. Differentiates from siblings like 'create_voice_from_preview' by specifying 'from audio samples'.

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 vs alternatives (e.g., 'create_voice_from_preview', 'design_voice'). Only implies usage through the input description but lacks when-not or alternative references.

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