delete_element

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden but only states the basic action without disclosing behavioral traits. It doesn't mention if deletion is permanent, requires specific permissions, affects other elements, or has side effects like layout shifts, which is critical for a destructive operation in a presentation context.

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, front-loaded sentence with zero waste—it directly states the tool's purpose without extra words. Every part of the sentence contributes to understanding the action and targeting mechanism.

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?

Given the tool's complexity as a destructive operation with no annotations or output schema, the description is incomplete. It lacks details on behavioral impact, error conditions, or what happens post-deletion, which are essential for safe and effective use in a presentation environment with many sibling tools.

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 fully documents all parameters. The description adds no additional meaning beyond implying the parameters are used for targeting, which the schema already covers. This meets the baseline for high schema coverage but doesn't enhance understanding.

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 action ('Delete') and target ('an element by type and index from a slide'), distinguishing it from other deletion tools like 'delete_slide'. However, it doesn't specify what constitutes an 'element' beyond the schema's enum, missing a brief clarification that could differentiate it further from siblings like 'remove_build_in'.

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. For example, it doesn't mention if this is for precise element removal versus bulk operations or how it relates to siblings like 'clear_slide' or 'remove_build_in', leaving the agent to infer usage from context alone.

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