get_slide_image

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

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does not reveal whether the tool searches existing images, generates AI images, what image sources/licenses apply, or whether output is a URL or binary. The vague phrase 'presentation-ready' adds little concrete behavioral detail.

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, concise sentence that is easy to scan and front-loaded with the action. It wastes no words, though it sacrifices substance for brevity.

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?

Although the tool is simple with only two parameters and an output schema exists, the description omits essential context such as image sourcing, licensing, acceptable file formats, and any constraints on topic or size. For a tool that retrieves images, the lack of behavioral or usage detail makes it underdeveloped.

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 should clarify the parameters. It only mentions 'presentation-ready' but does not explain that 'topic' is the subject of the image or that 'size' controls dimensions (despite the default of 1920x1080). The meaning of 'topic' and 'size' remains implicit and 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?

The description uses a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('presentation-ready images for slides and presentations'), making the core purpose clear. However, it does not differentiate this tool from siblings like create_quote_card or create_social_post, which could also produce presentation-related visuals.

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?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool vs. alternatives, such as web_search for finding images or create_quote_card for generating quote graphics. The description implies it is for slide-ready images but never states the intended use case or any exclusions.

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