ChatPPT

Overview Schema Source Related Servers Discussions Admin

slide_list

Read-only

List all slides in a presentation deck in order. Retrieve slide order and IDs from a deck so you can target specific slides for editing or preview.

Instructions

List all slides in a presentation deck in presentation order.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "deckId": "<deckId>"
    },
    "name": "slide_list"
  }
}

Input Schema

Name	Required	Description	Default
`deckId`	Yes	Stable ID of the presentation deck

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

First observedv0.2.0Nov 13, 2026

TDQS

B3.3/5.0

Behavior3/5

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

The readOnlyHint annotation already establishes this is a safe read, so the description's main contribution is the ordering guarantee ('presentation order'), which is genuine behavioral information an agent cannot get from annotations. However, it says nothing about return shape (IDs only vs. IDs plus titles), whether deleted/hidden slides are included, or pagination, despite there being no output schema to cover these.

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

Conciseness5/5

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

A single twelve-word sentence that is front-loaded with the verb and resource and carries the ordering detail as its only extra clause. Nothing is redundant.

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

Completeness3/5

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

For a simple one-parameter read tool with annotation coverage and a fully documented parameter, the essential calling information is present. The gap is the result side: no output schema exists and the description never says what each listed slide contains, nor whether large decks are paginated.

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% with a single required deckId parameter already documented as 'Stable ID of the presentation deck'. The description adds no format, source, or constraint details beyond the schema, so the baseline of 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb (List) and resource (slides) scoped to a presentation deck, which clearly separates it from deck-level and element-level listings. It doesn't explicitly name an alternative, but the resource and scope are unambiguous.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines2/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no when-to-use guidance, no mention of alternatives such as slide_read for content or element_list for per-slide elements, and no stated preconditions. The only implicit signal is 'in a presentation deck', which an agent must infer means 'when you need the slide inventory of a known deckId'.

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