voicebox_compose_in_character

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must disclose behavioral traits. It explains that it uses the profile's personality prompt to rewrite text, but does not mention side effects (e.g., whether it modifies the profile), error conditions, idempotency, or safety considerations. Lacks details necessary for informed invocation.

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 concise sentences that front-load the main purpose. No extraneous information or repetition. Every word contributes to understanding the tool's function.

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?

Output schema exists, so return values are covered. The description explains the core functionality and hints at a workflow. A minor gap is that it does not explicitly state the profile must have a personality prompt, but this is partially inferred. Overall, fairly complete for a simple 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 description coverage is 100%, so all parameters have descriptions. The tool description adds marginal context by linking profile_id to the personality prompt and prompt to rewriting. It does not significantly augment the schema descriptions, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

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?

Clearly states the tool composes text in a voice profile's character/personality. The verb 'compose' and resource 'text in voice profile's character' are specific. Distinguishes from sibling tools like voicebox_generate by noting the rewriting step and suitability for feeding back into generation.

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?

Explicitly mentions it is suitable for feeding back into voicebox_generate, providing clear context for when to use. Does not explicitly list when not to use, but the purpose is clear enough that an agent can infer alternatives (e.g., use voicebox_generate directly if no character rewrite needed).

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