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

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint=false, idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false and openWorldHint=true, so the mutation, safety and idempotency profile is covered. The description adds the important 1-indexed addressing convention, but says nothing about what happens on out-of-range slides or whether an active presentation is required.

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?

A single sentence that front-loads the action and packs the essential indexing detail with zero filler.

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 trivial single-parameter navigation tool whose annotations already cover safety and idempotency, the description is nearly sufficient. The main residual gap is stating that a live presentation must be active and how invalid slide numbers are handled.

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 0%, so the schema alone leaves 'slide' undocumented. The description partly compensates by specifying the indexing base (1-indexed), which is the key semantic an agent needs, but omits valid ranges or error behavior for invalid indices.

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?

Specific verb (Moves) plus resource (the live presentation) and target (the given slide), with the 1-indexed convention stated inline. It is clearly distinguishable from next_slide/previous_slide by 'the given slide', though it does not name those siblings explicitly.

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?

'Live presentation' implies this only applies while a presentation is running, giving implied context for use. However, there is no explicit guidance on when to use this versus next_slide or previous_slide, and no exclusions or prerequisites are stated.

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