Move slides

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

Beyond the annotations, the description reveals subtle behavior: insertion_index is evaluated before the move, and the moving-down example clarifies how indices are counted. This is valuable context that the annotation fields do not provide. It does not mention error behavior or response format, but the disclosed semantics are the most important part.

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 concise sentences cover the action, the critical constraints, and the recommended precursor step. The most important detail is front-loaded, and there is no filler or redundant elaboration.

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 mutation tool with three required parameters and no output schema, the description covers the essential call semantics, ordering constraints, and the need to check current order first. It could mention failure cases such as invalid or missing slide IDs, but the provided guidance is sufficient for a correct invocation in most cases.

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%, so the baseline is 3. The description adds meaning by emphasizing that slide_object_ids must contain no duplicates and by explaining the insertion_index behavior with a concrete moving-down example. This goes slightly beyond simply restating the schema.

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 states a specific verb and resource: 'Moves one or more slides to a new position.' It also names the underlying API operation (batchUpdate updateSlidesPosition), which clearly distinguishes it from sibling tools like add_slide, duplicate_slide, and delete_object.

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 practical guidance on preconditions: 'Use list_slides to see the current order first.' It also explains the required ordering and duplicate constraints. It does not explicitly contrast this tool with alternatives, but the purpose is clear enough that an agent can infer when reordering is the right operation.

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