slides_batch_update

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

With no annotations, the description adds useful behavioral context: 'one round-trip' and 'single atomic call' disclose efficiency and all-or-nothing semantics. However, it does not mention side effects (modification), permission needs, or failure behavior beyond atomicity, leaving gaps.

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 sentence that front-loads the action, then adds a clarifying clause about benefits and examples. It is succinct with no wasted words, effectively conveying the core idea.

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 complexity of raw API requests and zero schema/annotation coverage, the description is too brief. It lacks critical details about request formatting, valid edit types, and prerequisites, making it incomplete for reliable agent use.

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 0%, and the description only vaguely refers to 'a list of raw Slides API batchUpdate requests' without explaining the structure of each request object or what presentation_id means (beyond obvious name inference). This is insufficient for an agent to construct valid inputs.

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 uses a specific verb ('Apply') and clearly states the resource ('raw Slides API batchUpdate requests'), distinguishing it from sibling tools like docs_batch_update and individual slides_* tools. The mention of Slides API and batch operation makes its purpose unambiguous.

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 phrase 'instead of many tool calls' explicitly indicates when to use this tool (when combining multiple edits). It implies a preference for batch over individual calls but does not name specific alternatives or provide exclusions, so it lacks full 'when-not' guidance.

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