tts_system_info

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

No annotations are present, and the description does not disclose any behavioral traits such as whether the call is read-only, what data it returns, or any potential side effects. The agent has no context about what to expect.

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 short sentence, but it is under-specified. It is not verbose, yet it lacks useful structure or key details that would make it valuable beyond the tool name.

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?

With no output schema and no parameter details, the description is the only source of information. It does not explain what kind of information is returned or how it relates to the operations in sibling tools, leaving a significant gap.

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 zero parameters, so the schema defines nothing. Per rubric, the baseline for 0 parameters is 4. The description does not need to clarify parameter meaning, though it could describe what 'capabilities' means.

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 the verb 'get' and identifies the resource as 'text-to-speech capabilities,' but it is vague about what specific information is provided. It distinguishes from sibling tools (speak, save, list voices) by domain, but does not define the scope of 'capabilities.'

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 offers no guidance on when to use this tool compared to tts_list_voices or other siblings. No mention of prerequisites, use cases, or alternatives.

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