gws.slides.batch_update

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

Beyond the destructiveHint=true annotation, the description states the tool 'irreversibly modifies user content' and instructs to confirm intent, adding practical safety context. It also clarifies that requests are 'raw' and 'exactly as documented' the API, setting expectations for low-level 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?

Four concise sentences: purpose, parameter explanation, role statement, and safety warning. No redundancy, each sentence is directly useful.

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 destructive, low-level mutation tool, the description covers what it does, how to construct the main input, and critical safety instructions. Combined with existing annotations and schema, the agent has sufficient context to use it correctly.

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?

For 'requests', the description explains it's a JSON array of Slides API Request objects with examples, adding significant meaning beyond the schema. 'existing presentation' in the first sentence clarifies that presentation_id must reference an existing file. The 'account' parameter is not covered in the description, but schema covers it.

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 uses a specific verb ('Apply') and resource ('batch of raw Slides API requests to an existing presentation'), clearly distinguishing it from siblings like create or get. It also identifies itself as 'the general-purpose editing primitive,' which is a clear scope statement.

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?

It explicitly calls out that the caller constructs request objects, which implies it's for advanced/batch operations, and adds a warning to confirm before use on documents not created this session. It could name specific alternative tools (e.g., gws.slides.create) but the 'general-purpose editing primitive' phrase gives context for when to use it.

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