Dialogue tags are what Arthur Plotnik called stage management (William Sloane & Lawrence Block expressed similar sentiments in their books) & I less-politely call raisin-crapping. When you tell your characters to make animal noises while they read their lines, it's forced & intrusive -- imagine how irritated a director would get if your script was loaded with such niggling. Anytime you use something with more curlicues than "said," you're calling attention to your writing (& your presumed cleverness), which disrupts the reader's suspension of disbelief. If you go bad, you'll end up writing accidental Tom Swifties that'll make people snicker at you.
At best, dialogue tags are melodrama -- Wikipedia has a good entry for this term, & I recommend you read it.
Can these things be used? Sure! ...when you're purposely trying to do an over-the-top scene, or maybe playing the purpleness for laughs. Or if you're already of a stature approximating Steinbeck.
I just got done slogging through a ghastly novella, "The Gift of Nothing" by Joan Holly, that is obsessed with tagging every snippet of dialogue, & telling the reader how to interpret the scene that's unfolding. I estimate that chopping this patronising current out would reduce the story by almost 10%.
Harlan Ellison says these things were common in the heyday of the pulp genre magazines, because you were getting paid by the word, so only someone with a real job could afford to write tersely & to the point.
My preference is to avoid tags except to clarify. If you've got a dialogu, do you really need many reminders? And even if there's more, do all your characters talk the same way? (If so, your stage-directions are taking up the slack of shaky writing, which is probably where you should focus.)
