prepare_modify_component

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

No annotations exist, so description carries full burden. It discloses that no LLM call is made, describes the return object with stage field, and explains the two-stage workflow including backfill process. Lacks details on error handling or idempotency but covers main behavioral traits.

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?

Description is moderately long but well-structured with clear sections. The opening sentence is direct, followed by usage context and then parameter list. A bit wordy in the stage explanation but efficient overall.

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 5 parameters, no annotations, and presence of output schema (not shown), the description explains the return JSON structure and workflow stages. It provides enough context for an agent to use the tool correctly, but could include more about possible stage values and error scenarios.

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 coverage is 0%, so description compensates by listing each parameter with brief semantic descriptions (e.g., '1-based slide position', 'Natural-language description of the change'). Adds useful context beyond schema but could provide more constraints or examples.

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 a narrow single-component edit on a content slide, using specific verbs and resource. It explicitly distinguishes from sibling `prepare_slide_edit` by noting the broader scope of that tool.

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 provides explicit when-to-use (narrow changes like 'make the LLM box red') and when-not-to-use (broader changes, use `prepare_slide_edit`). It also explains the two possible stages and subsequent actions needed for each.

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