speaking_time

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

The description states that the tool estimates speaking time, implying a read-only calculation. However, it does not disclose any potential side effects, required permissions, or behavior beyond the basic estimation. The output schema exists but is not referenced in the description, so the agent must infer return structure from the schema alone.

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 extremely concise: one sentence and a two-line parameter list. Every part is valuable and there is no redundancy. It is well-structured and easy to parse.

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 calculation tool, the description covers the core functionality and parameter semantics. The presence of an output schema compensates for the lack of return value description. Minor gaps include no mention of edge cases or limitations, but these are not critical for this 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?

The description provides brief explanations for both parameters ('text' and 'wpm'), including the default value for wpm. Since the schema has 0% description coverage, this adds essential meaning beyond just type and title, though more detail (e.g., text format expectations) could be beneficial.

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's purpose: estimate speaking time for text given a words-per-minute rate. The verb 'estimate' and resource 'speaking time' are specific, and the tool distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'reading_time' by focusing on speaking rather than reading.

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 is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives, such as 'reading_time'. The description does not mention any prerequisites or contexts where this tool is preferred, leaving the agent without decision support.

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