delete_slides_element

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

Discloses key behaviors: permanence of deletion, use of Slides UI undo for recovery, non-idempotent nature ('re-calling with the same ID after success returns an error'), and required OAuth scope. No annotations provided, so the description carries full burden and does so thoroughly.

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?

Description is concise (~100 words), front-loaded with the core action, followed by usage details, requirements, and warnings. Every sentence adds meaningful information without redundancy.

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?

Covers all essential aspects: what it does, what it works on, permanence, idempotency, recovery options, and scope requirement. Existence of an output schema (not shown) likely complements return value information, but description itself is self-sufficient.

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 covers 2 of 3 parameters with descriptions (presentation_id, object_id). The description adds value by explaining how to obtain object IDs from get_presentation or creator tools. However, user_google_email parameter is not described in either the schema or the description.

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?

Description explicitly states 'Delete any object from a Google Slides presentation by its object ID', clearly enumerating supported object types (slide, shape, text box, etc.). Distinct from sibling tools like duplicate_slide or batch_update_presentation.

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?

Provides clear context on what can be deleted and the effect of different object IDs, and includes a limitation ('Cannot delete master/layout pages'). However, it does not explicitly discuss when to use this tool versus alternatives like batch_update_presentation.

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