text_to_speech

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It discloses key behaviors: file persistence regardless of inline rendering success, and the non-retry recommendation. It does not mention auth or rate limits, but for a simple TTS tool this is sufficient.

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 concise with two sentences and an IMPORTANT note. It is front-loaded with the core purpose, then crucial usage instructions. No extraneous 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?

No output schema exists, so the description handles behavioral explanation. It explains that the file is saved even if inline rendering fails. However, it doesn't explicitly state the return value or error handling, but it's adequate for a straightforward file-saving 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 coverage is 100%, so all parameters are described. The description adds value by clarifying the output_path usage and referencing get_voices for voice_id, going beyond the schema's basic descriptions.

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 'Convert text to speech audio using Smallest AI's Lightning TTS' and 'Saves the audio file to the specified path', providing a specific verb, resource, and outcome. It distinguishes from sibling tools like transcribe_audio by explicitly naming the TTS action.

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 provides explicit usage guidance: 'Always ask the user where to save the file before calling', suggests a default path, and advises 'Do NOT retry if successful — the file is saved even if inline audio rendering fails.' It also references get_voices for voice selection.

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