set_placeholder_text

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

With no annotations, the description fully carries behavioral disclosure. It reveals atomic saves with two-slot backup, backup=False rotation behavior, live='auto' behavior on locked files, and paragraph/newline semantics. This goes well beyond what the schema provides.

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?

Extremely dense but efficient: every clause adds operational detail. The main action is front-loaded, and the telegraphic style packs substantial semantics without filler.

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?

Covers placeholder resolution, paragraph levels, backup behavior, and live-mode nuance, while an output schema exists so return-value documentation is not required. Minor gaps remain around file_path/slide format details and live values beyond 'auto'.

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 thoroughly explains placeholder aliases, text newline/tab conventions, and paragraphs object shape, plus backup and live parameters. file_path and slide formats are left implicit, though their names are relatively self-explanatory.

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: 'Fill a layout placeholder' with a clear styling inheritance note. It is distinguishable from sibling tools like search_and_replace or fit_text, but does not explicitly name a sibling or draw an explicit contrast.

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?

Provides concrete guidance on placeholder value formats and notes that idx/paragraphs are file-mode only, which helps prevent misuse. It also routes free text boxes to 'graphics pack' as an alternative, though it does not name or compare against specific sibling tools.

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