add_image

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It explains that coordinates are percentages, which is helpful, but it does not state whether the image replaces existing content, how layering works, what happens on invalid paths, or any side effects on the slide.

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 brief and front-loaded: the primary action is in the first clause, and the coordinate clarification follows immediately. Both sentences carry substantive information, though the result is minimal and leaves gaps.

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 seven-parameter tool with no annotations, no output schema, and no sibling differentiation, this description is incomplete. It covers coordinate semantics but omits the meaning of doc_id and slide, any behavioral expectations, and any guidance on how this relates to insert_image or other slide-editing tools.

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 adds meaningful semantics for path ('absolute path') and for x/y/w/h ('percent of the slide'), which are critical details. However, doc_id and slide are left unexplained beyond their names, and no format or indexing information is given.

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 states a specific action and resource: 'Place an image from an absolute path.' It also usefully explains that x/y/w/h are percentages of the slide, clarifying the core operation. However, it does not distinguish this tool from the sibling insert_image, so the purpose is clear but not uniquely differentiated.

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 gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as insert_image, set_slide_background, or add_shape. It mentions input conventions but no context around prerequisites, coordinate origin, or typical use cases.

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