pitch_deck

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

With no annotations provided, the description carries full burden. It discloses the payment requirement, which is useful behavioral context, but lacks details on what 'generates' entails (e.g., format, output type, rate limits, or error handling). This is inadequate for a tool with 8 parameters and no output schema.

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 extremely concise with two sentences that directly state the purpose and a key requirement. Every word earns its place, and it's front-loaded with the main function.

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 complexity (8 parameters, 5 required), low schema coverage (13%), and no output schema, the description is incomplete. It doesn't explain what the tool returns, how parameters interact, or behavioral aspects beyond payment, leaving significant gaps for an AI agent.

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 low at 13%, with only one parameter ('signature') having a description. The tool description adds no information about parameters beyond the payment note, failing to compensate for the coverage gap. For example, it doesn't explain what 'slideCount' or 'askAmount' mean in context.

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 'Generates a pitch deck structure,' which is a specific verb+resource combination. It distinguishes from siblings like 'generate_quote' or 'social_planner' by focusing on pitch decks, though it doesn't explicitly differentiate from all alternatives.

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 mentions 'Requires payment (0.001 SOL),' which provides some usage context, but it doesn't specify when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., 'generate_terms' or 'lead_scorer'), nor does it outline prerequisites or exclusions beyond payment.

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