slides_delete_table_column

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of disclosing behavioral traits. It only states the action and does not mention reversibility, error handling (e.g., invalid column_index), or any side effects on the table structure. This is insufficient for a destructive operation.

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, clear sentence that directly conveys the tool's purpose. It is front-loaded and contains no unnecessary words, exemplifying concise and efficient structure.

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?

While the core purpose is clear, the description lacks any context about requirements (e.g., the table must exist and have at least one column), edge cases, or behavior when the column index is out of bounds. Given the presence of an output schema, return values are covered, but the description still feels incomplete for a mutation tool with no annotations.

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 does not elaborate on any of the three parameters. Critical details like whether column_index is 0-based or 1-based, or what table_object_id refers to, are missing. The description adds no meaning beyond the bare parameter names.

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 a column') and the target resource ('from an existing table on a slide'). It distinguishes this tool from siblings like slides_delete_table_row and docs_delete_table_column through the verb-resource combination.

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 the tool is used when you have an existing table on a slide and need to remove a column. However, it does not explicitly state when to use this vs. deleting a row or inserting a column, nor does it mention any prerequisites or exclusions.

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