Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
KitchenSink4AI

KitchenSink4PPT

by KitchenSink4AI
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

PowerPoint Comments and Review

ppt_review
Destructive

Manage PowerPoint threaded comments: add, reply, resolve, delete, and anonymize authors; a snapshot is saved before author changes.

Instructions

Review: add, reply to, resolve and delete modern threaded comments, and anonymize authors. Reading comments is ppt_read list_comments or ppt_inspect comment_report. anonymize_deck saves a snapshot automatically before changing anything, because the change cannot be undone in the file. Operations, one per line, as name: what it does:

  • add_comment: Add a modern threaded comment to a slide; a deck with legacy comments is refused. Leave author out to sign with the user's own name, or pass author="assistant" to sign as "AI Assistant via KS4PPT".

  • reply_to_comment: Reply to a modern comment thread (reply to the thread root, not to a reply). Leave author out to sign with the user's own name, or pass author="assistant" to sign as "AI Assistant via KS4PPT".

  • resolve_comment: Mark a modern comment thread resolved, or reopen it.

  • delete_comment: Delete a comment thread, or one reply; a thread with replies needs cascade_replies=true.

  • anonymize_deck: Replace author names in properties and comments throughout the deck; a snapshot is saved first because this cannot be undone in the file.

  • update_now: Install the newer version the update notice named; call only when the user asks or agrees.

  • update_notices: Turn update notices on or off, or show their status (action).

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
opYesThe operation to run: one of the operations listed in this tool's description.
argsNoThe operation's arguments as an object, including file_path unless the operation names other paths or reads no deck; unknown keys are refused. Slides count from 1 in slide_number and from 0 in slide: the user's slide 2 is slide_number 2 or slide 1. ppt_help lists every argument.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Addedv2.0.0

TDQS

A4.3/5.0
Behavior4/5

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

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true and readOnlyHint=false, but the description goes further: it states anonymize_deck is irreversible in the file and auto-snapshots first, and that add_comment is refused on legacy-comment decks. It does not address idempotency or what the openWorld behavior means in practice, which keeps it short of a 5.

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

Conciseness4/5

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

The one-operation-per-line list is well front-loaded and each bullet earns its place. The snapshot-before-anonymize warning is duplicated in the opening paragraph and again in the anonymize_deck bullet, which is the one avoidable redundancy.

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

Completeness4/5

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

Given a heterogeneous 7-op dispatcher with a free-form args object and no output schema, the description supplies the operation inventory, the key argument conventions, and a pointer to ppt_help for full argument lists. An agent can pick and call an operation correctly; only the return shape of each op is left unstated, which is acceptable without an output schema.

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

Parameters3/5

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

Schema coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3, and both top-level parameters (op, args) are already documented there. The description does add real meaning inside the free-form args object — the author omission/'assistant' signing convention, cascade_replies=true for threaded deletes, and the 1-based vs 0-based slide convention — but those live in prose bullets rather than being tied to argument names, and ppt_help is deferred to for the rest.

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?

Opening sentence names the domain (threaded comments and author anonymization) with specific verbs, then enumerates all seven operations with a one-line definition each. It explicitly separates itself from ppt_read list_comments and ppt_inspect comment_report, so an agent can place it among siblings without opening a schema.

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?

It names the reading alternatives and the condition that selects them, and it gates update_now ("call only when the user asks or agrees"). Per-operation preconditions (legacy-comment decks refused, cascade_replies required for threads with replies) tell the agent when a call will fail before it is made.

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

Deploy Server

Other Tools