workspace_new_slide

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

Since there are no annotations, this operational detail—dropping the pointer-events lock, clicking the toolbar button, settling—discloses what the tool does beyond a mere 'adds a slide,' giving the agent context about side effects like lock state and UI interaction.

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?

Two sentences, with the main purpose front-loaded and the implementation details in one concise second sentence. No wasted words.

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 zero-parameter tool with an output schema, the description fully explains the action, the behavioral prerequisites, and the recommended follow-up. It's sufficient for an agent to invoke and integrate into a workflow.

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?

The tool takes zero parameters, so the description doesn't need to explain any. It also references the parameter for the subsequent workspace_write call, providing additional context.

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 clear verb+resource: 'Add a new slide in Google Slides,' and also provides the keyboard shortcut equivalent (Ctrl+M), which uniquely identifies the tool's scope among generic browser automation siblings.

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?

It provides clear context on the operational sequence—dropping the pointer-events lock, clicking the button, and settling—and explicitly directs the caller to use workspace_write afterwards. However, it doesn't state when not to use it or mention alternatives.

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