create_presentation_slides

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

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=false, so the description's mention of 'insert it into an AFFiNE document' reinforces the mutating nature without adding significant new behavioral details. There is no mention of permissions, reversibility, or behavior when workspaceId is omitted, but the annotations lower the burden. The description adds minimal context beyond the annotations.

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 a single, focused sentence that front-loads the action and includes the key output format ('ND-JSON') and target ('AFFiNE document'). Every word contributes to understanding the tool's purpose, with no redundancy or filler.

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 the tool has an output schema and complete parameter descriptions in the schema, the description covers the essential purpose. It could mention whether a new document is created or an existing one is used, but the presence of the output schema and annotations compensates. The description is adequate for a tool of this complexity.

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 mentions 'structured ND-JSON' which gives context on the expected output format, but it does not add detailed parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides. It adds marginal value over the schema.

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 the tool's function: 'Generate a structured ND-JSON presentation slide deck outline and insert it into an AFFiNE document.' It specifies a unique verb (generate/insert), a distinct resource (presentation slide deck outline), and the target system (AFFiNE document), distinguishing it from sibling tools like create_doc or create_semantic_page.

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 implies the tool is used for creating presentation slide outlines, which provides clear context. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or specify when not to use it, so it lacks explicit exclusions. The context is sufficiently clear to infer usage.

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