text_to_speech

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

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral transparency burden. It discloses that the tool returns a task id, status, and output URLs, suggesting asynchronous behavior, but does not mention authentication requirements, potential costs, or how to handle task completion. This is moderate but incomplete disclosure.

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 a single sentence, concise and front-loaded with the core action. It avoids redundancy and every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose and basic output.

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?

Despite having 10 parameters and a complex schema with required speakers and dialogue_turns, the description gives no overview of the asynchronous task workflow, how to structure a request, or how to associate dialogue turns with speakers. The minimal single-sentence description is insufficient for a tool of this 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 80%, so the schema already explains most parameters. The description adds no additional parameter context, such as how to structure speakers or dialogue_turns, beyond what the schema provides. 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 it creates a Gemini TTS task on RunAPI, using the specific verb 'Create' and naming the resource. This distinguishes it from siblings like get_task and check_pricing, which have different purposes.

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 creating TTS tasks but provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as get_task for retrieving results or check_pricing for cost information. It lacks exclusions or direct references to sibling tools.

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