generate_ppt_html

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

No annotations, so description carries full burden: discloses 2–4MB output size, 72h download short-link default, base64 fallback, offline self-containment. Missing only info on failure modes or rate limits, but the delivery behavior is well covered.

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?

Dense but efficient single paragraph front-loading the core transformation, then prerequisites and delivery mode. No wasted sentences, though multi-clause parentheses make it busy.

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?

Covers the transformation, upstream/downstream sequencing, skill/protocol prerequisites, and delivery semantics for a 3-param, no-output-schema tool. Adequate; only missing edge-case/error behavior.

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 coverage is 100% and each parameter already has a description (file_name, return_mode enum with url recommendation, content_html). Description restates return_mode default but adds little beyond the schema. Baseline 3 is correct.

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?

Specific verb+resource: wraps content HTML into a self-contained offline HTML presentation with Plotly.js inlined. Clearly distinguishes itself from siblings like generate_dashboard/generate_word_report and names ppt_extract_data as the upstream data step.

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?

Explicit sequence: first use ppt_extract_data, then this tool; consult get_skill_instructions(skill=ppt) for HTML structure; prerequisite get_protocol_instructions. States the recommended delivery mode (url) and its rationale. Nothing left to inference.

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