create_slides_text_box

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

With no annotations, description carries full burden. It discloses behavior (adds text box, positions in EMU, requires OAuth scope) but lacks details on potential side effects, error cases, or limits (e.g., max text length). Still, it covers key behavioral traits sufficiently.

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?

Concise at 5 sentences, front-loaded with purpose and alternatives, then units and auth. Every sentence adds value with no redundancy or filler.

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 11 parameters, no annotations, and existing output schema, the description is fairly complete. It covers purpose, usage guidelines, units, and auth. Lacks details on behavior when optional parameters are omitted or output format, but schema and output schema compensate. Good overall.

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 100% with descriptions for each parameter. Description adds context about EMU units and OAuth scope but does not enrich individual parameter meanings. Baseline of 3 is appropriate since schema already does the heavy lifting.

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?

Clearly states 'Add a text box to a slide with initial content and position' and distinguishes from sibling tools (create_slides_shape for shapes, batch_update_presentation for editing existing text). The verb+resource combination is specific and 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?

Explicitly tells when to use this tool (for text content), and when to use alternatives (create_slides_shape for geometric shapes, batch_update_presentation for editing existing text). Provides clear context and exclusions.

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