soul_speak

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses the error condition (MISSING_SOUL_DEPENDENCY) and recovery action. However, it does not state if the tool has side effects (e.g., file creation), read-only nature, or authentication needs. The warning adds value but gaps remain.

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, front-loaded with purpose. The warning is essential but slightly extends length. No unnecessary words, efficient for the information conveyed.

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?

Covers the main error scenario and dependency. An output schema exists (not shown), so return value explanation is not required. Could mention output format details or limitations (e.g., language support), but overall adequate for a TTS tool.

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%, so baseline is 3. The description mentions 'mapped to Big Five psychological variables' but the schema already details each parameter's effect (e.g., 'Openness score...affecting voice modulation'). No additional semantic value beyond the 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?

The description clearly states 'Executes local TTS voice synthesis mapped to Big Five psychological variables,' specifying the action (executes), resource (TTS), and distinctive mapping to Big Five parameters. This distinguishes it from all siblings, such as 'soul_listen' which likely performs the inverse function.

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?

Provides explicit guidance on a key precondition: the tool returns an error if the NFT matrix is uninitialized, and directs to use 'purchase_undesirables_license_key' in that case. This is clear context for handling the dependency, though broader when-to-use vs alternatives is omitted.

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