flowspeech_new_request_id

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

With no annotations present, the description does real work: it discloses that generation is local, requires no network, and needs no API key — covering the auth and side-effect questions an agent would otherwise have to guess at. It stops short of saying whether the UUID is persisted or how it relates to server-side records.

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 short sentences, front-loaded with the operation and its constraints. The second sentence is worth including but its phrasing is loose enough to require a re-read.

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 zero-parameter utility with no output schema, the description covers purpose, execution environment, and timing well enough to call it correctly; the return value (a UUID string) is only implied by the word 'UUID' but is inferable.

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 takes zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate; baseline 4 applies. The description correctly implies no configuration is needed.

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 and resource ('Generate a fresh request UUID') plus the key execution constraint ('locally, without network access or an API key'). No sibling tool (tts, tts_multi, list_voices, quota, get_job) overlaps with this operation, so an agent can identify it unambiguously.

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 second sentence ('Keep it before starting one recording') implies a call-ordering rule but is awkwardly phrased and never names which sibling operation starts a recording, nor what happens if an ID is reused. Usage is implied rather than specified.

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