vocametrix_calculate_dsi

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

No annotations exist, and the description lacks any mention of side effects, permissions, or whether the tool modifies data. It only describes the calculation, leaving behavioral traits undisclosed.

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 that efficiently convey purpose, reference range, and input requirements. No wasted words.

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?

Without output schema, the description omits return format. Given many sibling tools, it could provide more context on when DSI is appropriate. It adequately describes inputs but leaves completeness gaps.

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?

Schema coverage is 86%, and the description adds context for some parameters (e.g., MPT meaning). However, it mentions 'F0 range' while the schema has 'maximumF0' only, causing minor ambiguity. Overall, it adds moderate value beyond the schema.

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 calculates DSI and provides reference ranges. It distinguishes from siblings by naming the specific index, but doesn't explicitly contrast with other voice assessment tools.

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 lists required inputs (WAV file, MPT, F0 range, minimum intensity) but does not specify when to use this tool over other voice metrics or provide exclusions. Usage is implied but not explicitly guided.

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