vocametrix_calculate_spectral

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It discloses the output (age/gender-normalized norms and classification), indicating a read-only operation, but does not elaborate on computational requirements, potential errors, or whether any data is modified.

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 extremely concise—two sentences—and front-loads the key output measures. Every word adds value, with no redundancy 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 complexity and absence of an output schema, the description provides a functional overview but omits important context such as expected audio format, sample rate prerequisites, or what the classification labels mean. It is adequate but leaves 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 75%, with three of four parameters described in the schema. The description adds no new parameter-level detail; it only reinforces that the input should be a sustained vowel. The 'version' parameter lacks any explanation beyond its default value.

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 identifies the tool's purpose: extracting advanced spectral measures from a sustained vowel. It specifies the exact measures (center of gravity, skewness, H1-H2, etc.), distinguishing it from sibling tools that focus on individual measures or other acoustic features.

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 the tool is for comprehensive spectral analysis of sustained vowels, but does not explicitly state when to use it over other spectral tools (e.g., vocametrix_calculate_h1_h2). No when-not-to-use guidance or alternative recommendations are provided.

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