slides_delete_object

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden for behavioral disclosure. It only states the deletion action but does not mention permanence, reversibility, required permissions, or any side effects. For a destructive operation, this is a significant gap.

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 is direct, front-loaded with the verb and target, and contains no redundant information. It is appropriately concise for the tool's simple purpose.

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?

The tool is simple with two string parameters and an output schema, so return values are covered. However, for a destructive operation with no annotations, the description should include a note about irreversibility or confirm permanence. It is adequate but not fully complete.

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 0%, and the description partially compensates by indicating that object_id refers to a shape, image, table, or video, and that they are deleted from a presentation. However, it does not explain how to obtain object_id or any constraints on presentation_id, so it adds some but not full meaning.

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 the resource ('a shape, image, table, or video from a presentation'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like slides_delete_slide (deleting a slide) and slides_delete_table_row/column (deleting table parts), making the specific purpose unmistakable.

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 context by naming the object types, but it does not explicitly provide when-to-use vs. alternatives or exclusions (e.g., 'for deleting a whole slide, use slides_delete_slide'). Guidance is inferred rather than stated.

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