create_powerpoint

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It only states the input (POM XML) and output (.pptx file), with no disclosure of side effects, error handling, return values, or permissions. This is minimal guidance 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?

The description is a single, focused sentence that front-loads the priority use case and conveys the core function. There is no redundant information, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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?

Without annotations or an output schema, the description should explain return values or behavior, but it does not. It also does not mention related tools like get-pom-guide or validate-pom-slide. For a file-generation tool with four parameters, more detail is needed for full contextual completeness.

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 description coverage is 100%, with detailed descriptions and examples for all four parameters. The description itself adds no extra meaning beyond the schema, so it remains at the baseline of 3.

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 tool generates a .pptx file from POM-format XML, identifying the specific verb ('generate') and resource ('PowerPoint file'). However, it does not explicitly distinguish this from the sibling tool create_powerpoint_from_template, so it does not fully earn a 5.

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 explicitly says '【最優先で使用】' (use with highest priority) and 'when the user requests creation of a PowerPoint file', giving clear when-to-use context. It does not mention exclusions or alternatives, so it misses the top score.

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