Duplicate a slide

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

The description discloses important behavioral details beyond the annotations: the copy includes all elements and speaker notes, lands immediately after the original, works for page elements with a slight offset, and returns the new objectId. This is exactly the side-effect and response information an agent needs, and it does not contradict the readOnly/idempotent annotations.

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?

Three focused sentences front-load the action and then add placement, return-value, and follow-up guidance. Every sentence carries useful information with no filler or repetition of schema content.

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?

The description covers the operation's behavior, result position, returned value, and even the page-element edge case. Given that there is no output schema, mentioning that the new objectId comes back in the reply is especially valuable, making the definition complete for an agent to invoke correctly.

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 coverage is 100% and both parameters already have clear descriptions, so the baseline is 3. The description's mention of page-element support is already present in the slide_object_id schema description, and the 'new objectId' detail concerns the response rather than the parameters.

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 opens with a specific verb and resource: 'Duplicates a slide.' It further disambiguates by noting it wraps batchUpdate duplicateObject and extends to 'any page element id,' which clearly distinguishes it from add_slide and other slide-creation tools.

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 gives clear usage context: the duplicate lands immediately after the original and can be repositioned with move_slides afterwards. It names a sibling tool as a follow-up, but it does not explicitly explain when to prefer duplicate_slide over add_slide or another alternative.

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