get_slide_preview

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

No annotations are provided, so the description carries the full burden. It says 'detailed preview' but does not disclose read-only behavior, what is included, or how it handles missing files or invalid slide numbers. This is not misleading, but it is under-specified.

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 a single, front-loaded sentence with no filler. It conveys the essential operation without redundant restatement of parameter names or sibling context.

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 two-parameter read-style tool with a full output schema, this is close to sufficient, but the missing use-case guidance and behavioral detail prevent it from being fully complete. An agent can likely call it correctly, but not confidently know when it is the right choice versus get_slide_info or export tools.

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 schema already provides high-quality, 100% descriptions for both parameters. The phrase 'specific slide' reinforces the slide_number parameter, but the description adds no additional semantic value beyond the 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 identifies the verb ('Get') and resource ('detailed preview of a specific slide's content'), making it easy to recognize what the tool does. It is slightly vague about how this differs from the sibling get_slide_info, so it does not fully earn a 5.

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 instead of get_slide_info, export_powerpoint_markdown, or translate_specific_slides. The description gives a definitional statement but no contextual signal for tool selection.

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