Growth Build Slideshows

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

Annotations already declare write (readOnlyHint=false), idempotentHint=true, destructiveHint=false, openWorldHint=true. The description adds value beyond that: it discloses the exact write path, that image generation is delegated to the app's external AI (fal) with the hook/slide text supplied by the caller, and that no scheduling occurs.

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?

Front-loaded with the action and artifact, then use conditions, then the return shape. No filler sentences; every clause carries information an agent needs.

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?

With an output schema present, the return value need not be spelled out, and annotations cover the safety profile. The description covers when, what, where, and the external image dependency. Minor gaps remain around failure behavior for individual slideshow sets and whether output directories are overwritten.

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 description coverage is 100%, so the baseline is 3. The description goes further by clarifying the division of labor in `slideshows` (caller writes hooks/text, `image_prompt` is rendered by fal) and by documenting the output resolution for the nested slide objects.

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?

States a specific verb (Render) plus the resource (viral TikTok/Reels slideshows at 1080x1920 PNGs) and the exact output location convention (marketing/growth/<name>/NN.png). No sibling does slideshow rendering, so the agent can identify it immediately.

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?

Gives explicit use conditions: 'post-launch content only, after the app is submitted' and an exclusion, 'No scheduling.' It does not name an alternative tool for adjacent needs (e.g. design_export_png or screenshot_build_all), so it stops short of full when-vs-alternative routing.

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