wps_wpp_move_slide

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It fails to disclose side effects (e.g., how other slides re-index after the move), error conditions (e.g., invalid slide_index), or whether the tool operates on the active presentation. The statement is too minimal.

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, clear sentence is perfectly concise. Every word earns its place—no fluff, no repetition. Ideal for quick parsing.

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 simple move operation with two parameters and no output schema, the description captures the essential action. However, it omits details about index shifting after the move, possibly confusing the agent about the result. It is minimally adequate but not thorough.

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?

Both parameters have descriptive schema comments (slide_index: 'Slide number to move'; to_position: 'Target position (starting from 1)'). Schema coverage is 100%, so the description adds no additional meaning beyond what is already in the schema. Baseline score of 3 is appropriate.

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 '把指定幻灯片移动到新位置' (Move the specified slide to a new position) uses a specific verb ('move') and resource ('slide'), clearly distinguishing it from sibling tools like delete_slide, duplicate_slide, or add_slide.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., duplicate_slide vs. move_slide) or any prerequisites (e.g., the presentation must be open). The agent receives no context for decision-making.

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