preview_text_enhancement

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosure. It reveals key behavioral traits: the tool performs SSML pauses and number expansion, and it does not consume API credits. It does not explicitly describe the return format, but 'preview' strongly implies the enhanced text is returned, and the simple nature of the tool mitigates this gap.

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 concise sentences with front-loaded purpose and practical usage advice. Every word provides value, with no redundant or irrelevant information.

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?

Given the tool's simplicity (one parameter, no output schema), the description fully covers what an agent needs to know: what it does, when to use it, and why (cost savings). The context is complete for its complexity.

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 provides a clear description for the single parameter 'text', covering 100% of the parameter semantics. The tool description adds only minimal additional context ('scripts') beyond what the schema states, so it meets the baseline without significantly enhancing understanding.

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's purpose: it previews how text will be enhanced with SSML pauses and number expansion. This specific verb ('preview') and resource ('text enhancement') distinguish it from sibling tools like text_to_speech, which actually synthesize audio.

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 says 'Use this to check and tweak scripts without burning API credits,' providing a clear when-to-use and implying a cost-saving alternative to actual TTS. This makes the usage context and distinction from sibling tools evident.

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