list_voices

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must cover behavioral traits. It does not mention that the tool is read-only, has no side effects, or other behavioral details, leaving the agent uninformed.

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 sentences with no wasted words. The first sentence states the purpose and output fields, the second adds context about AI matching. Efficiently front-loaded.

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 parameterless listing tool, the description is complete. It covers what is returned and why it matters, despite no output schema. Sibling tools like configure_voice_and_script provide context for usage flow.

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 tool has 0 parameters and 100% schema coverage, yet the description adds value by listing the specific metadata fields returned (id, name, gender, trait, description, tags, suggestedFor), which the schema does not detail.

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 '返回所有可用配音音色' (returns all available dubbing voices), specifying the verb and resource. It lists metadata fields (id, name, gender, etc.), distinguishing it from siblings like configure_voice_and_script.

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 says AI uses the output to automatically match voice to content tone, implying when to use this tool (for voice selection). However, it does not explicitly state when not to use it or mention alternatives.

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