serve_revealjs_html

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

Since no annotations are provided, the description carries the transparency burden and does so well: it discloses that it starts an ephemeral background HTTP server, serves the workspace so assets resolve, optionally opens a browser, and may reuse an existing server. It does not explicitly state the full server lifecycle or when to call stop_previews_server, but the behavior is generally 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 well-structured into purpose, Args, and Returns sections. Each sentence adds meaningful context about behavior or parameters, and there is very little fluff or tautological language.

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?

The description is sufficient despite only one required parameter and an output schema already being present. It covers key context about the preview server, asset resolution, browser opening, reuse behavior, and return content. There are no major gaps for using this tool 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 description fully compensates for the 0% schema coverage by explaining every parameter: dest, workspace_dir, host, port, and open_browser, including defaults and behaviors such as ephemeral ports and resolution relative to workspace_dir. This goes well beyond the bare schema.

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 it serves an exported Reveal.js HTML deck on a local HTTP server for preview. It uses a specific verb and resource, and it distinguishes itself from sibling tools like export_revealjs_html, stop_preview_server, and preview_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 provides clear context: it is for previewing an exported Reveal.js deck via a local URL. It implies when to use it (after export, before final review) but does not explicitly mention alternatives or exclusion conditions such as using stop_preview_server for cleanup.

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