create_presentation

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It usefully discloses that the result is empty (no slides), but says nothing about required permissions, what is returned (e.g., an ID needed to add slides), or whether workspaceId placement has side effects. The one disclosed trait is meaningful but the mutation profile is under-specified.

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?

Two short sentences with zero waste; the core action is front-loaded and the alternative follows immediately.

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 simple three-parameter create tool with no output schema, the description covers what it makes and which sibling to prefer. It omits return-value expectations (an agent likely needs the new presentation's ID) and any permission notes, but those gaps are minor at this complexity.

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%, so title, darkMode and workspaceId are already fully documented in the schema, including the 'omit for personal' default. The description adds no parameter meaning beyond that, so the baseline 3 applies.

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 (create) and resource (presentation) and adds the scope qualifier 'empty', which distinguishes it from the sibling create_presentation_with_slides. An agent can pick between the two create tools from the description alone.

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?

Explicitly routes the agent to create_presentation_with_slides for efficiency, implying this tool is for the case where no slides are supplied yet. It gives clear context but no explicit when-not condition or statement that this is the correct choice when slides will be added incrementally.

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