unpark_slides

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

With no annotations, description carries full burden. Mentions '1 API call' for efficiency but omits details like idempotency, side effects (e.g., error if slides not parked), or required permissions. Lacks transparency for a mutation tool.

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?

Short (2 sentences) but at expense of critical info. Efficient in length but under-specified for a tool with 2 required parameters and no annotation support.

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?

Despite having an output schema and 2 params, description fails to explain return structure or behavioral details. Minimal context leaves agent with gaps for correct invocation.

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 0%, yet description provides no parameter explanations. Agent must infer that presentation_id and slide_ids are needed but no guidance on format or constraints.

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 clearly states action (unhide slides) and target (previously parked slides). The verb 'unhide' and phrase 'mark not skipped' precisely define the operation, distinguishing it from sibling tools like park_slides.

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?

Implied as inverse of park_slides, but no explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance. Sibling names provide context but description itself lacks direct alternatives or exclusions.

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