presentation_list

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

No annotations are provided, and the description only mentions listing and optional filtering. It does not disclose return format, pagination, sorting, or side effects. Since it is a read-only list operation, the lack of detail is somewhat acceptable, but the burden is on the description and it falls short of full transparency.

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, concise sentence that front-loads the core action and filter. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or fluff.

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 tool is simple with one optional parameter and no output schema. The description covers the core function and filter, but it does not clarify whether the response contains full presentation objects or summaries, or if pagination applies. These minor gaps prevent a perfect score, but overall it is sufficiently complete for a straightforward list operation.

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 documents the single 'owner' parameter at 100% coverage with a description ('Filtrar por dueño (opcional)'). The tool description merely repeats this optional filter without adding any new semantic detail, so it adds no 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 states the action ('Lista las presentaciones guardadas') and the resource (presentations). The optional owner filter is mentioned, and the scope 'guardadas' distinguishes it from version-listing or other operations.

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 usage is implied by the verb 'Lista' and the mention of an optional owner filter, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as presentation_get or presentation_list_versions. No exclusions or alternative recommendations are provided.

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