voicebox_save_audio

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must fully disclose behavioral traits. It lacks details on whether the tool blocks, handles file overwrites, error behavior, or authentication requirements. The output schema is present but not mentioned.

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?

Description is a single sentence, which is concise but at the expense of necessary information. It could be restructured to include usage hints or prerequisites without being verbose.

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?

Given the presence of an output schema, the description need not explain return values. However, it fails to mention that the generation must exist or that the tool might overwrite existing files. The context of generation lifecycle (e.g., waiting for completion) is missing, but the tool's purpose is reasonably clear.

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?

Input schema has 100% coverage for both parameters (generation_id and output_path). The description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, so baseline score 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?

Description clearly states the action (download and save) and resource (generation's audio), distinguishing it from related tools like voicebox_save_capture_audio and voicebox_save_version_audio. However, it does not clarify whether 'download' implies remote retrieval or local file copying, which could cause ambiguity.

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?

No guidance provided on when to use this tool vs alternatives (e.g., voicebox_export_generation_audio) or prerequisites (e.g., generation must exist and be complete). The agent is left to infer context from the name alone.

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