Voices Clone Voice

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

Annotations already indicate a write-like, open-world operation. The description adds transparency by specifying the prerequisite (upload via 'assets_create-upload-url'), the external provider ('elevenlabs'), and the output (voice 'id'). This goes beyond what annotations alone provide, though it is not exhaustive.

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 well-structured sentence that front-loads the main action and follows with key parameters and return value. No wasted words, easily scannable.

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 4-required-param tool with no output schema, the description covers the overall workflow (upload, clone, use for TTS) and return value. The main gap is the ambiguous 'or' that conflicts with the schema's requirement of both url and assetId, which could lead to incomplete invocation.

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 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains 'assetId' via the upload flow, 'provider' as 'elevenlabs', and 'url' as 'Sync-hosted'. However, it states 'pass a url or an assetId', while the schema requires both, creating a critical ambiguity that could mislead invocation.

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 'Clone' and identifies the resource ('custom voice') and the source ('audio or video sample'). It clearly distinguishes from sibling tools by mentioning the return of a voice 'id' for 'tts_create', separating it from voice listing/deletion tools.

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 provides a clear usage context, including how to obtain an assetId via 'assets_create-upload-url first' and how the result is used by 'tts_create'. It does not explicitly exclude alternatives, but the context implies when this tool is appropriate versus listing or deleting voices.

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