tts_speech

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states the tool 'returns audio', implying it is a read-only generation operation. However, it does not mention any potential side effects, latency, or model-specific behaviors. Adequate but minimal.

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 sentence that conveys the essential information: the action (synthesis), the model used, and the output format. It is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary words, earning its place.

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 absence of an output schema, the description mentions the return format (opus/wav) but does not detail the structure of the response (e.g., binary, URL). The tool has 4 parameters, but the description does not explain how they interplay or provide usage examples. Completeness is adequate but could be improved.

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%, meaning each parameter already has a schema description. The tool description adds no additional meaning beyond the schema, which is the baseline expectation. No extra context is provided for parameters like 'instructions' or 'voice'.

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 explicitly states 'Text-to-speech synthesis using OmniVoice model', which clearly identifies the tool's purpose. It also mentions the output format (opus/wav), providing additional clarity. No sibling tool performs TTS, so distinction is clear.

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 provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It only states what the tool does, leaving usage context implicit. A brief note about when TTS is appropriate would improve this dimension.

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