Stage Voice Ack

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden and does well: it discloses immediacy ('at once'), the 10-second freshness rule, the no-overlap constraint, the reply shape ({played}), and that it emits nothing. It omits operational prerequisites (does a stage/scene need to be live?) and any failure behavior beyond the two stated guards.

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, front-loaded with the action and motive, then the play conditions and return shape. Dense but every clause carries information; 'Emits: nothing' is slightly redundant given a declared output schema.

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?

Return values are covered by an output schema and the description confirms {played}, so that side is fine. The missing piece is the required 'scene' argument entirely, which is a real blocker for correct invocation of an otherwise well-described tool.

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 single parameter 'scene' has 0% schema description coverage and the description never mentions it. For a tool whose only input is undocumented, the description should explain what a scene identifier is and how to obtain it; the gap is left entirely to guesswork.

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?

States a specific verb and resource: plays a recorded "got it" cue in the headset when a voice note arrives, and identifies the underlying page command (ack). The action is unmistakable, though it never explicitly contrasts itself with the closely related stage_voice_note or stage_say siblings.

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?

Gives the motivating context (so the person knows a voice note arrived) plus concrete gating conditions: only if the command is under 10 s old by server ts, and not over a line already playing. It does not name an alternative tool for the stale or busy cases, so it stops short of full when/when-not routing.

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