Add Slide

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 fully discloses that the tool has no backend implementation and will not work, giving the agent complete transparency about its behavior.

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 sentence, front-loaded with 'Not implementable,' which immediately conveys the critical constraint. There is zero wasted wording, making it highly concise and well-structured.

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 non-implementable tool, the description is complete: it states the limitation, and since there is no output schema or functional behavior, no further details are needed. The agent knows everything required to avoid misuse.

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?

The description does not explain the parameters, but it renders them irrelevant by stating the tool is not implementable. This compensates for the 0% schema description coverage by telling the agent not to attempt invocation, so parameter meanings are unnecessary.

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 intended operation (add slide) and explicitly says it is not implementable due to the Canva Connect API lacking an endpoint. This unambiguously tells the agent what the tool would do but that it is non-functional. It distinguishes itself from siblings by being the only one marked as non-implementable.

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?

'Not implementable' is an explicit instruction to never use this tool under any circumstances, providing a clear when-not condition. It does not name alternatives, but the exclusion is absolute, which is highly actionable guidance for an AI agent.

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