speak

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

The description discloses the side-effect of automatically starting the browser interface, which is useful, but with no annotations it doesn't cover return values, blocking behavior, or error conditions.

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 focused sentences, front-loaded with the action, no wasted words.

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 one-parameter tool with a clear schema, the description covers the key behavior and side effect; it's sufficient for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 already fully describes the text parameter, and the description adds no additional meaning beyond restating that text is spoken.

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 uses a specific verb 'Speak' and identifies the resource 'text using browser text-to-speech', making the action clear and distinguishing it from sibling tools like voice_status and get_voice_input.

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?

It implies the tool is for speaking text aloud but does not explicitly state when to use it versus alternatives, nor provide exclusions or prerequisites beyond noting the browser auto-start.

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