rehearse_say

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It hints that this is a simulation via 'rehearsal' and specifies the caller's role, but says nothing about side effects, whether the agent responds, permissions, or reversibility.

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?

A single tight sentence with no padding, front-loaded on the action. It is efficient, though its brevity borders on under-specification rather than being a structural flaw.

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?

An output schema exists, so return values are covered, and two required params need guidance. With no annotations and 0% parameter coverage, the description leaves too much unstated for a multi-agent rehearsal tool that sends a message.

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 0% — the schema gives only bare titles 'Text' and 'Call Id'. The description implies text is the utterance and call_id identifies the rehearsal but adds no format, constraints, or meaning beyond that obvious mapping.

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?

States a specific verb (say) and scopes it to a running rehearsal and a role (the person being called), which distinguishes it from rehearse_call and end_rehearsal. However 'say something to the agent' remains slightly abstract about the actual effect.

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?

'In a running rehearsal' implies the prerequisite that a rehearsal must already be active, which is useful context. It does not explicitly name alternatives or state when-not to use it versus sibling tools like answer or rehearse_call.

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