update_library_metadata_by_ids_voice_activity

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

Annotations already indicate this is a non-destructive, idempotent write. The description adds minimal behavioral context beyond 'detect voice activity' and does not explain whether detection runs synchronously, returns results, or updates metadata. No contradiction with annotations, but little extra transparency.

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?

Compact and front-loaded with the core purpose, followed by endpoint and parameter definitions. No wasted sentences, though the endpoint line adds little beyond the name.

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 3-parameter operation with an output schema and safety annotations, the description covers the basics. It omits when to use it versus similar update_library_metadata_by_ids_* siblings, and does not clarify operational behavior such as rerun semantics or side effects beyond parameter names.

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 0%, so the description must define parameters. It does so for all three: ids as comma-separated IDs, force as re-run control, and manual as manual-run indication. It lacks value formats or examples for force/manual, but it compensates for the schema gap well.

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 states a specific action ('Detect voice activity') on a specific resource (voice activity for library metadata IDs). It is distinct from sibling operations like addetect, analyze, or intro, though it does not explicitly contrast itself with them.

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?

No guidance on when to use this tool rather than a sibling, or when to set force vs manual. The parameter hints are present, but there is no contextual decision-making help.

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