get_presentations

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

No annotations are provided, so the description must carry the behavioral transparency burden. It clearly states the tool lists presentations owned by the user, but does not mention any behavioral traits like read-only, pagination, or sorting. The description is adequate but minimal.

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?

Two sentences, no waste. The first sentence clearly states purpose, the second provides usage context. Efficient and front-loaded.

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 no output schema, the description explains the return value (list of presentations) implicitly. It is complete enough for a simple list tool with no parameters. A minor gap is the lack of mention that there is no filtering or sorting.

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 no parameters (100% coverage), so the description correctly adds no parameter details. The baseline is 4 per guidelines, as no compensation is needed. The description implies the tool returns a list of presentations, which adds value.

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 the tool lists presentations owned by the authenticated user, using specific verb+resource. However, it does not differentiate from siblings like get_themes or get_vibes, which serve distinct purposes.

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?

Explicitly states when to use (to pick a presentation_id before editing, exporting, or deleting) and implies when not to use (if no existing presentation is needed). This indirectly guides the agent away from using this tool for creation or other tasks.

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