Set Slides View Mode

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It simply states the action without revealing side effects, persistence, or whether it affects the current slide or all slides. There is no mention of reversibility or any impact on other editor state, making the behavior opaque.

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 concise sentence, front-loaded with the action. Every word is informative—'Switch between grid and single-slide view'—with no filler or redundancy. It is optimally structured for quick parsing by an AI agent.

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?

The tool is simple with one enum parameter and no output schema, so the description covers the core functionality adequately. However, it does not provide any contextual guidance about when to use this tool or how it relates to sibling tools like focus_slide or set_viewport. For a tool of this simplicity, missing such guidance is a minor gap, hence a 4.

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% because the 'mode' parameter has an enum and description 'View mode'. The tool description does not add meaning beyond what the schema already provides; it merely restates the two enum values. Baseline 3 is appropriate when schema handles parameter semantics.

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 'Switch between grid and single-slide view' uses a specific verb ('switch') and clearly identifies the resource (slides view) and the two possible modes. It distinguishes from sibling tools like get_slide_grid (which retrieves grid data) and set_viewport (which sets coordinates), making the tool's purpose unambiguous.

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 no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention exclusions, prerequisites, or typical scenarios. For example, it does not contrast with get_slide_grid or focus_slide, leaving the agent without context for selection.

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