prepare_design_slide

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

Although no annotations are provided, the description discloses key behavioral traits: no LLM call, returns a prompt and schema, and slides are independent for parallel execution. This fully informs the agent of the tool's safe, non-destructive role.

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-loads the core purpose and key constraint ('No LLM call'), but the description is slightly verbose with the 'Returns' list and could merge some lines without losing clarity.

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 annotations and an output schema listed but not detailed, the description sufficiently covers the tool's role in the pipeline, its dependencies (prepare_design_doc_draft), and the expected output fields, making it fully actionable for an agent.

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 description adds meaning beyond schema names by explaining each parameter's role (e.g., slide_index is 1-based, outline_json optional, total_slides default infers). However, it does not specify the JSON format for outline_json or validate constraints, leaving some ambiguity.

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 it prepares the prompt and JSON schema for generating one slide's design spec, distinguishing it from related sibling tools like ingest_design_slide and prepare_design_doc_draft.

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?

Provides explicit instructions to generate the slide spec JSON conforming to response_schema and then call ingest_design_slide, plus guidance on parallelization across slides and ordering relative to prepare_design_doc_draft.

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