update_slide

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

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits. It states 'incremental modification' hinting at partial updates, but fails to detail any side effects, required permissions, or constraints. The agent cannot anticipate the tool's behavior beyond basic modification.

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 extremely short (4 characters) but not effectively concise—it sacrifices necessary detail. The tool definition would benefit from at least a sentence explaining the scope of modification.

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?

Given the complexity (3 required parameters, no output schema, no annotations), the description is under-specified. It does not explain the nature of the 'instruction' parameter or what the tool returns. The agent lacks sufficient context to use this tool appropriately.

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 input schema has 100% coverage with minimal descriptions, but the description does not add meaning beyond the schema. 'instruction' remains vague as '修改指令' without specifying format or scope. Baseline 3 is appropriate as schema covers parameters but description adds little.

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 '增量修改单页' communicates that the tool modifies a single slide incrementally, which is a specific verb and resource. However, it lacks detail on what specific modifications are possible, and the sibling tools like auto_fix_deck and create_deck are not differentiated.

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?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus siblings. For example, it does not clarify when to use update_slide instead of create_deck or auto_fix_deck. The description offers no context for tool selection.

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