clear_slide

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It states the tool 'clears' content, implying a destructive operation, but doesn't specify whether this is reversible, what permissions are required, whether it affects speaker notes, or what happens to animations/transitions. The description provides basic intent but lacks important behavioral details for a mutation tool.

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?

The description is a single, well-structured sentence that efficiently conveys the core functionality without any wasted words. It's front-loaded with the main action and includes important qualifiers about what gets preserved.

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 no annotations and no output schema, the description provides adequate basic functionality but lacks important context about behavioral traits, error conditions, and what constitutes 'user-created content.' It's minimally viable but has clear gaps in completeness for a tool that modifies presentation state.

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 100%, so the schema already documents both parameters completely. The description doesn't add any parameter-specific information beyond what's in the schema. This meets the baseline expectation when schema coverage is high.

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 clearly states the specific action ('clear all user-created content') and target resource ('from a slide'), with precise scope ('preserving background images and theme placeholders'). It effectively distinguishes this tool from siblings like delete_slide (which removes the entire slide) or delete_element (which removes specific elements).

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 implies usage when you want to reset slide content while keeping formatting, but doesn't explicitly state when to use this versus alternatives like delete_slide or manually deleting elements. No guidance is provided on prerequisites, side effects, or integration with other tools.

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