get-pom-guide

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

With no annotations, the description must convey behavior, and it does by describing the tool as a retrieval action ('取得します') of the POM specification. It also enumerates the exact content returned (node types, properties, layout methods), making the read-only, informational nature clear.

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 compact and front-loaded with the mandatory action. It lists the covered node types in a single parenthetical and includes only relevant instruction and content information, with no filler.

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?

For a 0-parameter guide-retrieval tool with no output schema, the description is complete: it specifies when to run it, what the guide contains, and its relationship to create_powerpoint. An agent has enough context to select and invoke it correctly.

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 tool has zero parameters and an empty properties schema, so there are no parameter details to document. The 0-param baseline of 4 applies, and the description appropriately focuses on content rather than parameter semantics.

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 states a clear action ('取得します') and a specific resource: the POM format specification along with node types, properties, and layout methods. It also ties the tool to the create_powerpoint workflow, which distinguishes it from sibling tools like get-slide-example and validate-pom-slide.

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 instructs when to use the tool: 'PowerPointスライドを作成する前に必ず実行してください' and 'create_powerpointツールを使用する前に'. This is clear contextual guidance, though it does not mention exclusions or alternative tools for other use cases.

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