delete_slide

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

Annotations contain only the title, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It reveals the important side effect that 'every later slide shifts down by one' and advises deleting from the highest index downwards, which is valuable operational context. It does not explicitly state permanence or permission requirements, but the destructive nature is clear from 'Remove/Delete.'

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?

Three tight paragraphs each earn their place: the operation, a usage rationale, and parameter-specific guidance. The description is front-loaded with 'Remove a slide from the presentation' and contains no filler or redundant claims.

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?

With an output schema present, there is no need to document return values. The description covers the operation, the rationale, and the critical index-shift behavior, leaving only minor gaps such as permission requirements or explicit irreversibility.

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?

The input schema provides no parameter descriptions, so the description compensates for slide_index by documenting that it is 0-based and explaining the re-indexing effect. presentation_id is not described, but its meaning is self-evident from the name and is a common parameter across sibling tools.

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 opens with 'Remove a slide from the presentation,' a specific verb and resource that clearly distinguishes it from siblings like add_slide, move_slide, and duplicate_slide. The subsequent rationale about dropping unneeded template slides reinforces the tool's intended purpose without ambiguity.

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 description explicitly states when to use the tool ('Use this to drop template slides whose content you don't need') and even provides a when-not ('Deleting is preferable to blanking a slide out'). It also gives practical advice for bulk deletion, though it does not name specific alternative sibling tools like move_slide or duplicate_slide.

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