Get slide

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

readOnlyHint=true already declares the safety profile, so the description's job is to add return-side context — and it does, listing the exact element attributes and speaker notes the caller will receive despite there being no output schema. Nothing about failure behavior for a missing slide ID is covered, which keeps it from a 5.

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, zero filler, with the payload contents front-loaded before the workflow hint. Every clause earns its place.

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 two-param read tool with fully documented schema and readOnlyHint, the description covers what is returned and when to call it. Only the error case (nonexistent slideId) and cross-presentation scoping are left unstated, which are minor gaps.

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% and both parameters (slideId, presentationId) are documented with sourcing hints (URL, get_presentation/list_slides). The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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?

States a specific verb and resource ('Get one slide') and enumerates exactly what comes back: element IDs, types, text, positions, sizes and speaker notes. It is clearly distinguishable from get_presentation and list_slides by the singular scope and element-level payload, though it never names those siblings explicitly.

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?

'Use this before editing elements' gives a concrete workflow precondition that tells the agent when to reach for this tool. There is no when-not guidance or named alternative (e.g., list_slides for a skim), but the context is unambiguous.

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