vocametrix_calculate_h1_h2

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose all behavioral traits. It only explains the output interpretation but fails to mention any side effects, file system interactions, or required audio properties (e.g., sample rate, duration). This leaves significant behavioral gaps.

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 sentences, front-loading the core action and adding interpretive context. Every word serves a purpose, with no redundancy or filler.

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 simple two-parameter calculation tool with no output schema, the description covers the essential purpose and output interpretation. Missing behavioral details (e.g., whether it modifies files) would be useful but are not critical for a read-only-like compute operation. The completeness is adequate for the tool's 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?

Schema description coverage is 50% (only sustainedVowelPath has a brief description). The description does not add meaning for patientGender or clarify format expectations for the path. It adds no parameter-specific context beyond the schema, so the score is at the baseline for moderate coverage.

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 explicitly states that the tool calculates the formant-corrected H1*–H2* voice source measure from sustained vowels, and distinguishes it from other calculate_ tools by specifying the exact metric and its interpretation (breathiness). This provides a clear, specific verb+resource combination.

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 implies usage for sustained vowel analysis but offers no explicit guidance on when to choose this tool over sibling measures like CPP or HNR. There is no mention of prerequisites, contraindications, or alternative tools, leaving the agent to infer suitability based on the metric definition.

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