reorder_slides

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It reveals that the operation is a single API call and implies moving slides. However, it fails to mention any side effects on other slides, required permissions, or whether changes are reversible. This is minimally sufficient but lacks depth.

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 extremely concise: one sentence plus a parenthetical note. Every word adds value, and the key information is front-loaded. There is no redundancy or fluff.

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 the tool's simplicity and the presence of an output schema (not shown), the description is adequate for a basic understanding but lacks details such as whether 'slide_ids' must be contiguous, what happens when 'insertion_index' is out of range, or any error conditions. The output schema might cover return values, but the description itself is 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?

The schema has 0% description coverage, so the tool description must compensate. It hints that 'slide_ids' represent 'a block of slides' and 'insertion_index' is the 'new position'. However, it doesn't explain that 'presentation_id' is required, nor does it clarify ordering, indexing (0-based?), or constraints. The description adds some value but is incomplete.

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 ('move a block of slides'), the resource ('slides'), and the destination ('new position'). It also notes it is a single API call, distinguishing it from batch operations. The sibling tools include duplicate and delete, so this purpose is well differentiated.

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 provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives like 'duplicate_slide' or 'park_slides'. There is no mention of prerequisites, context, or when not to use it, leaving the AI agent without decision support.

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