move_slide

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

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses atomic reordering of related files, no LLM call, and the need for a subsequent export. However, it does not mention potential side effects like undo ability or failure modes.

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 well-structured with clear sections. It starts with the main action, then key notes, then Args and Returns. Every sentence adds value, no wasted words.

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 tool with 3 simple parameters and an output schema, the description covers the main purpose, parameter semantics, side effects, and required follow-up. It doesn't detail the output schema but states what fields are returned, which is sufficient.

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 0%, so description compensates. It explains all three parameters, noting that indices are 1-based, which adds meaning beyond the schema types. No further constraints like valid ranges are given, but it's adequate.

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 'Moves a slide from one position to another' with a specific verb and resource. It also mentions it's a file reordering without LLM call, distinguishing it from siblings like delete_slide or export_html.

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 description explicitly states a required post-action: 'After this call, you must call export_html to refresh HTML.' This provides clear usage context, but could be stronger on when to use this tool vs alternatives, though siblings are quite distinct.

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