vocametrix_full_voice_assessment

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

No annotations provided, so description carries full burden. Discloses parallel execution and output format (JSON report with metrics and severity interpretation). Lacks details on side effects, error behavior, or prerequisites like audio format requirements.

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?

Three sentences, each serving a purpose: action + scope, output description, and usage context. No superfluous words; information is front-loaded.

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 complex tool with no output schema, description covers main purpose and required inputs. However, it lacks specifics on output structure (exact metrics, severity scale) and does not address prerequisites like sample rate. Could be more complete.

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 100%, baseline 3. Description adds context for sustainedVowelPath and connectedSpeechPath (e.g., '/a/ held 3+ s'), but does not enhance understandability of patientAge and patientGender beyond 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?

Description clearly states 'Run a comprehensive clinical voice assessment' and lists the specific analyses executed (AVQI, CPP, etc.), distinguishing it from sibling tools that calculate individual metrics.

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?

Explicitly says when to use ('full voice quality screening') and specifies required recording types. However, it does not mention when not to use or alternatives like individual calculate_* tools for single metrics.

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