Remove a slide

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

Annotations only say readOnlyHint=false and openWorldHint=false; the description adds the substantive detail that the frame and content are destroyed, the keep_content escape hatch, and the exception when another step shares the frame. It stops short of stating irreversibility/no-undo or what happens on an invalid step.

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?

One sentence, front-loaded with the action and the destructive consequence. Every clause carries information: deletion scope, the keep_content override, and the shared-frame exception.

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 mutation tool with no output schema this covers the main hazard (data loss and how to avoid it), but gaps remain: the semantics/validity of the required step parameter and error behavior on a missing slide. Annotations carry only the safety flag, so a bit more description would help.

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 coverage is only 33%: path is documented but step and keep_content are not. The description recovers keep_content's meaning and implies step identifies which slide, but it never clarifies whether step is a 0/1-based index or a timeline ordering, leaving a required parameter under-specified.

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 ("Removes a slide from the show") and names the two things affected (frame and content), which is well beyond a tautology of the title. It is clearly distinct from add_slide/render_slide/arrange_slides by implication, but never explicitly contrasts itself with those siblings.

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 destructive condition (content deleted unless keep_content is true) implies when to set the flag, but there is no explicit guidance on when to use this over arrange_slides or edit_presentation, nor on required preconditions. Usage is inferable from the verb rather than stated.

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