get_slide_info

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure, but it only says 'get information.' It does not describe whether the operation changes files, requires authentication, opens read-only, performs disk access beyond the given path, or has performance implications. The 'get' verb implies a read, but little else is transparent.

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 short, direct, and front-loaded, with no filler. It is appropriately compact for a tool with one parameter, but its brevity also skips useful context about the returned data and how this tool differs from nearby siblings.

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 simple one-parameter tool with an output schema, the description is minimally adequate. However, given the presence of purpose-overlapping siblings such as get_slide_preview, a little more context about what makes get_slide_info distinct would meaningfully improve the definition.

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 single parameter input_file is already fully described in the schema as 'Path to the PowerPoint file (.pptx).' The description adds no parameter-level detail beyond that, so it meets the baseline for high schema coverage without adding new meaning.

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 verb and resource — it 'gets information about slides' from a PowerPoint file. It is understandable, but 'information' is vague and does not define what kinds of slide data are returned, so it stops short of a fully precise statement.

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?

There is no guidance about when to use this tool over its siblings like get_slide_preview, export_powerpoint_markdown, or translate_specific_slides. The agent is not told whether this is the right fit for a casual read, a translation workflow, or a visual check, so selection depends entirely on inference.

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