vocametrix_calculate_voice_dynamics

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

No annotations are provided, so the description bears full responsibility. It states the tool computes metrics but does not disclose whether it modifies input files, has side effects, requires network access, or what happens on error. The description implies read-only behavior but does not confirm it.

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, no redundancy. First sentence delivers the core function (compute specific metrics), second sentence provides relevant use contexts. Every word earns its place.

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 has 3 parameters and no output schema, the description hints at the return values (composite scores) but does not specify structure, file format requirements beyond WAV, or any prerequisites. Adequate but not comprehensive for an AI agent to fully understand behavior.

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 100% (all three parameters have descriptions), so the bar is low. The tool description adds minimal extra meaning beyond listing output concepts; it does not detail parameter constraints or dependencies. Baseline 3 is appropriate.

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 computes intensity dynamics, pitch-intensity correlation, and composite scores for specific voice dimensions. It distinguishes itself from sibling tools like calculate_jitter_shimmer or calculate_hnr by specifying exactly what metrics it produces, making its purpose unmistakable.

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 use cases (voice training, coaching, fatigue assessment) but does not guide when to use this tool vs. alternatives among the many calculate_* siblings. No explicit when-not-to-use or comparison with other tools, limiting decision support.

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