Skip to main content
Glama

replace_slides_text

Replace all occurrences of literal text in a Google Slides presentation, including shapes, tables, and speaker notes. Supports case-sensitive or insensitive matching.

Instructions

Find-and-replace a literal string across every text element in the deck.

Scans all slides, text boxes, shapes, table cells, and speaker notes. Replaces every occurrence of find_text with replace_text in a single batch operation. Plain substring match — no regex, wildcards, or whole-word matching. To do scoped replacement within a single element, edit the text range directly via format_slides_text or modify_doc_text equivalents.

Requires OAuth scope: https://www.googleapis.com/auth/presentations (write). Idempotent: re-running after all matches are replaced is a no-op (returns 0 occurrences).

Input Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
user_google_emailYes
presentation_idYesGoogle Slides presentation ID (from the URL after `/d/`).
find_textYesLiteral text to search for. Exact-match substring; no regex, no special characters. Must be non-empty (empty string errors). Newlines inside `find_text` only match if the original document has the same literal newline characters.
replace_textYesText to substitute for each occurrence. Can be empty to effectively delete matches.
match_caseNoWhen `True` (default), matching is case-sensitive (`Hello` won't match `hello`). When `False`, case-insensitive — any capitalization variant matches and is replaced by the literal `replace_text` verbatim (original casing is not preserved).

Output Schema

TableJSON Schema
NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
resultYes
Behavior4/5

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

With no annotations provided, the description fully carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains scanning all text elements, batch operation, substring matching, idempotency (re-run no-op), and OAuth scope requirement. It lacks mention of whether it modifies the presentation in-place or potential rate limits, but covers most key behaviors.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise and well-structured, with five sentences that front-load the main purpose. Every sentence adds value: scope, batch nature, matching mode, alternatives, OAuth, and idempotency. No fluff or repetition.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the tool's complexity (5 parameters, output schema exists), the description covers all necessary aspects: scanning scope, matching mode, behavioral traits (idempotency, OAuth), and alternatives for scoped replacement. The existence of an output schema reduces the need to explain return values, but the description still hints at the return (0 occurrences). This is complete for agent understanding.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 80%, so baseline is 3. The description adds meaning beyond the schema: it clarifies that find_text is an exact substring match with literal newline interpretation, and explains match_case behavior (case-sensitive default, case-insensitive doesn't preserve original casing). This adds value for two parameters, lifting the score above baseline.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states it performs a find-and-replace of a literal string across all text elements in a Google Slides presentation. It specifies the resource (slides text) and scope (all slides, text boxes, shapes, table cells, speaker notes), distinguishing it from sibling tools like format_slides_text (scoped) and modify_doc_text (for Docs).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines5/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly provides guidance on when to use this tool vs. alternatives: for global replacement, while for scoped replacement within a single element, it directs to format_slides_text or modify_doc_text. It also clarifies it's a batch operation with plain substring matching, no regex or wildcards, helping the agent decide appropriateness.

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

Install Server

Other Tools

Latest Blog Posts

MCP directory API

We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.

curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/HuntsDesk/ve-gws'

If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server