document.delete_slides

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It usefully discloses one real behavioral trait, the refusal to empty the deck, but omits whether the deletion is undoable, whether the operation is atomic when some indices are invalid, and how the indices are based.

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 short sentences with the core action first and the constraint second. Nothing is wasted and every sentence 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 destructive tool with no annotations and no output schema, the guardrail note is valuable but the definition stops short. It never states what the tool returns on success or failure and never defines the index semantics that determine correctness.

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 the description must compensate. It only restates 'the given indices' without specifying 0-based indexing, accepted ordering, duplicate handling, or out-of-range behavior, leaving the sole parameter effectively undocumented.

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: deletes slides at given indices. The plural 'indices' implies a batch operation, which differentiates it in spirit from the singular document.remove_slide, but the description never names that sibling or makes the distinction explicit.

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?

Usage is only implied by the plural indices and the emptiness guardrail. With both document.remove_slide and document.delete_slides in the sibling list, an agent gets no explicit guidance on which to pick when deleting one slide.

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