FreeDailyPro Tools

pptx_split

Read-onlyIdempotent

Split a PowerPoint (.pptx) from freedailypro into several presentations, returned as ONE ZIP (base64) of .pptx files, each a complete editable deck keeping its own slides' notes, pictures, charts and tables. mode: each (one file per slide; default), every (every N slides, give every), or range (ranges such as '1-3,5,8-': one file per range, or one file with all of them when rangesAsFiles is false). At most 100 files. Errors name the slide numbers that do not exist.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "fileBase64": "<fileBase64>"
    },
    "name": "pptx_split"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description
`mode`	No	Default: range when ranges is given, every when every is given, otherwise each.
`every`	No	every mode: slides per file, for example 5
`ranges`	No	range mode: comma-separated slides or ranges, for example 1-3,5,8- (8- means 8 to the end)
`fileName`	No	Base name for the files inside the ZIP, for example talk.pptx gives talk_slide-01.pptx
`fileBase64`	Yes	The presentation (.pptx), base64 encoded. Up to 50 MB and 500 slides. Old .ppt files and password-protected files are not supported.
`rangesAsFiles`	No	range mode: true (default) makes one file per range; false puts every chosen slide into one file.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

AddedOct 28, 2026

TDQS

A4.1/5.0

Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare readOnly/idempotent/non-destructive, so the safety bar is met; the description adds valuable behavior beyond that: output is a base64 ZIP of full editable decks, the 100-file cap, and that errors name nonexistent slide numbers. It does not discuss size limits itself (those sit in the schema), keeping it just under a 5.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness4/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loads the core action and output format, then mode behavior, then limits and errors — a logical order with no filler. It is a single dense paragraph with parenthetical nesting, which is slightly harder to scan than a bulleted or sentence-per-idea layout.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema, the description correctly spells out the return value (base64 ZIP of .pptx files) and per-file contents (notes, pictures, charts, tables). Input constraints like 50 MB / 500 slides live in the schema, so the only mild gap is not restating those limits in the description.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema coverage is 100% and the schema already documents mode defaults, 'every', 'ranges' syntax, and 'rangesAsFiles'. The description restates mode semantics and the '1-3,5,8-' range example, adding little syntax beyond the structured fields, so the baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb ('Split') and resource ('PowerPoint (.pptx)') plus the exact output shape (one ZIP, base64, of complete editable .pptx decks). The file-type and split semantics distinguish it from siblings like pptx_merge and pdf_split without needing their schemas.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Explains the three modes and their selection logic ('each' default, 'every N', 'range'), and notes the 100-file cap, which gives real guidance on which mode to pick. It stops short of saying when to prefer this tool over alternatives such as pptx_organize or pptx_extract_*, so it is clear context without explicit exclusions.

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

All FreeDailyPro Tools tools Inspect

Try in Browser

One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources

Need Help?